-
Categories
-
Pharmaceutical Intermediates
-
Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients
-
Food Additives
- Industrial Coatings
- Agrochemicals
- Dyes and Pigments
- Surfactant
- Flavors and Fragrances
- Chemical Reagents
- Catalyst and Auxiliary
- Natural Products
- Inorganic Chemistry
-
Organic Chemistry
-
Biochemical Engineering
- Analytical Chemistry
- Cosmetic Ingredient
-
Pharmaceutical Intermediates
Promotion
ECHEMI Mall
Wholesale
Weekly Price
Exhibition
News
-
Trade Service
On April 7, "New England Medicine" published a communication article from the Institute of Microbiology and Epidemiology of the Chinese Academy of Military Medical Sciences and the Texas Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
The neutralizing antibody test results of the domestic vaccine against B.
1.
1.
7 and B.
1.
351 mutant strains.
The article pointed out that in the context of the global SARS-CoV-2 variant strain, people are worried about affecting the efficacy of the vaccine.
In order to determine the resistance of these variant strains to infection or vaccine-induced neutralization, the researchers prepared spikes containing Wuhan-1 reference strain (wild type), D614G mutation, B.
1.
1.
7 or B.
1.
351 variant strain Protein SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviruses, these pseudoviruses are based on recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus.
The researchers evaluated the neutralizing activity of convalescent serum and vaccinated sera against D614G, B.
1.
1.
7, and B.
1.
351 mutants compared with the neutralizing activity of wild-type pseudovirus.
Compared with the neutralizing effect of wild-type virus, the neutralizing effect of the convalescent serum against D614G pseudovirus was significantly enhanced (2.
4 times; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.
9~3.
0), against the B.
1.
1.
7 mutant strain The neutralizing efficacy of B.
1.
351 pseudovirus was similar, and the neutralizing efficacy of B.
1.
351 pseudovirus was significantly reduced (0.
5-fold; 95% CI, 0.
4-0.
7) (Figure 1B).
In addition, 9 out of 30 convalescent serum samples completely lost neutralizing activity to B.
1.
351. Susceptibility of Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Variants to Neutralization, April 6, 2021, DOI: 10.
1056/NEJMc2103022 In the serum samples of Sinopharm BBIBP-CorV vaccinators, although the neutralizing antibody GMT against the variant strain and the GMT against the wild-type virus There was no significant difference, but 20 serum samples completely or partially lost the neutralizing activity of B.
1.
351 (Figure 1C).
In the serum samples of Kerrlive vaccine vaccinators, we observed that B.
1.
1.
7 (0.
5 times; 95% CI, 0.
3 to 0.
7) and B.
1.
351 (0.
3 times; 95% CI, 0.
2 to 0.
4) The serum neutralizing antibody GMT was significantly reduced.
In addition, most serum samples completely or partially lost the neutralizing activity of B.
1.
351 (Figure 1D).
This study shows that B.
1.
1.
7 has little resistance to the neutralizing activity of the convalescent or vaccine serum, while B.
1.
351 has little resistance to the convalescent serum (by factor 2) and the vaccine serum (neutralizing a factor).
Strong resistance.
2.
5 to 3.
3) higher than wild-type virus.
Most of the vaccine serum samples tested lost neutralizing activity.
This finding is consistent with other recent neutralization studies using convalescent serum or serum obtained from mRNA or BBIBP-CorV vaccine recipients.
This finding also shows the importance of continuous virus mutation monitoring and evaluation of vaccine protection efficacy in areas where variants are endemic.
Previously (October 2020), "BBIBP-CorV" was published by "The Lancet Infectious Diseases" by the Henan Provincial Center for Disease Control, Beijing Institute of Biological Products and China Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
And phase II test results, its safety and tolerability are good.
Not only does it produce an effective immune response in healthy people aged 18 to 59, but more importantly, it is also safe and effective in elderly people over 60 years old.
In terms of vaccine safety and tolerability in the Phase I study, 192 people were randomly assigned to receive different doses of vaccine or placebo.
Of the 144 vaccinated persons, 42 (29%) had adverse reactions within the first 7 days after vaccination, which was mainly manifested in pain at the vaccination site, followed by fever, but all were mild or moderate.
Within 28 days of vaccination, the researchers did not observe serious adverse reactions.
In terms of vaccine safety and tolerability in the Phase II study, 448 people were randomly assigned to receive different doses of vaccine or placebo.
Of the 336 vaccinated persons, 76 (23%) had adverse reactions in the first 7 days after vaccination, mainly manifested in fever; another placebo subject reported grade 3 fever, but it was self-limiting And have recovered, these adverse reactions are mild or moderate.
Kexing's preliminary statistical analysis of the third phase of clinical research data published by Kexing on its website stated that as of December 16 last year, there were more than 12,000 medical staff aged 18 and over in Brazil participating in the trial study, 14 days apart.
The protective effect of two doses of vaccine is: the protective effect of all new coronary cases including mild cases that do not require medical treatment is 50.
65%, and the protective effect of new coronary cases with obvious symptoms and requiring medical treatment is 83.
70%.
The protective effect of severe and death cases is 100.
00%.
In the Phase 3 clinical trial in Turkey, more than 900 high-risk medical staff between 18 and 59 years old and more than 6,400 general persons at normal risk participated.
As of December 23 last year, more than 1,300 people had completed two doses of vaccination.
The results showed that 14 days after the two doses of vaccination, the protective effect of preventing the virus was 91.
25%.
On February 3, "The Lancet Infectious Diseases" (Infectious Diseases) published online the results of the Kellyford vaccine in the phase I/II clinical study for healthy people aged 60 and over.
Among them, more than 400 healthy people aged 60 and above will be vaccinated in Hebei in 2020.
Among them, 72 people participated in the first phase of the trial.
After two doses of the vaccine, the antibody production ratio was 95.
7% to 100%; and the 350 people who participated in the second phase of the trial had an antibody ratio of 90.
7% to 99%.
The results also show that the Kerrlive vaccine has good safety and immunogenicity for healthy people aged 60 and over, which is comparable to the results of healthy people aged 18-59.
At present, Kerlaifu vaccine is 18-59 years old in China, but some overseas countries have expanded this vaccine to the elderly.
Reference: Susceptibility of Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Variants to Neutralization, April 6, 2021, DOI: 10.
1056/NEJMc2103022 Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV: a randomised, double-blind, placebo- controlled, phase 1/2 trial,DOI:https://doi.
org/10.
1016/S1473-3099(20)30831-8
The neutralizing antibody test results of the domestic vaccine against B.
1.
1.
7 and B.
1.
351 mutant strains.
The article pointed out that in the context of the global SARS-CoV-2 variant strain, people are worried about affecting the efficacy of the vaccine.
In order to determine the resistance of these variant strains to infection or vaccine-induced neutralization, the researchers prepared spikes containing Wuhan-1 reference strain (wild type), D614G mutation, B.
1.
1.
7 or B.
1.
351 variant strain Protein SARS-CoV-2 pseudoviruses, these pseudoviruses are based on recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus.
The researchers evaluated the neutralizing activity of convalescent serum and vaccinated sera against D614G, B.
1.
1.
7, and B.
1.
351 mutants compared with the neutralizing activity of wild-type pseudovirus.
Compared with the neutralizing effect of wild-type virus, the neutralizing effect of the convalescent serum against D614G pseudovirus was significantly enhanced (2.
4 times; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.
9~3.
0), against the B.
1.
1.
7 mutant strain The neutralizing efficacy of B.
1.
351 pseudovirus was similar, and the neutralizing efficacy of B.
1.
351 pseudovirus was significantly reduced (0.
5-fold; 95% CI, 0.
4-0.
7) (Figure 1B).
In addition, 9 out of 30 convalescent serum samples completely lost neutralizing activity to B.
1.
351. Susceptibility of Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Variants to Neutralization, April 6, 2021, DOI: 10.
1056/NEJMc2103022 In the serum samples of Sinopharm BBIBP-CorV vaccinators, although the neutralizing antibody GMT against the variant strain and the GMT against the wild-type virus There was no significant difference, but 20 serum samples completely or partially lost the neutralizing activity of B.
1.
351 (Figure 1C).
In the serum samples of Kerrlive vaccine vaccinators, we observed that B.
1.
1.
7 (0.
5 times; 95% CI, 0.
3 to 0.
7) and B.
1.
351 (0.
3 times; 95% CI, 0.
2 to 0.
4) The serum neutralizing antibody GMT was significantly reduced.
In addition, most serum samples completely or partially lost the neutralizing activity of B.
1.
351 (Figure 1D).
This study shows that B.
1.
1.
7 has little resistance to the neutralizing activity of the convalescent or vaccine serum, while B.
1.
351 has little resistance to the convalescent serum (by factor 2) and the vaccine serum (neutralizing a factor).
Strong resistance.
2.
5 to 3.
3) higher than wild-type virus.
Most of the vaccine serum samples tested lost neutralizing activity.
This finding is consistent with other recent neutralization studies using convalescent serum or serum obtained from mRNA or BBIBP-CorV vaccine recipients.
This finding also shows the importance of continuous virus mutation monitoring and evaluation of vaccine protection efficacy in areas where variants are endemic.
Previously (October 2020), "BBIBP-CorV" was published by "The Lancet Infectious Diseases" by the Henan Provincial Center for Disease Control, Beijing Institute of Biological Products and China Center for Disease Control and Prevention.
And phase II test results, its safety and tolerability are good.
Not only does it produce an effective immune response in healthy people aged 18 to 59, but more importantly, it is also safe and effective in elderly people over 60 years old.
In terms of vaccine safety and tolerability in the Phase I study, 192 people were randomly assigned to receive different doses of vaccine or placebo.
Of the 144 vaccinated persons, 42 (29%) had adverse reactions within the first 7 days after vaccination, which was mainly manifested in pain at the vaccination site, followed by fever, but all were mild or moderate.
Within 28 days of vaccination, the researchers did not observe serious adverse reactions.
In terms of vaccine safety and tolerability in the Phase II study, 448 people were randomly assigned to receive different doses of vaccine or placebo.
Of the 336 vaccinated persons, 76 (23%) had adverse reactions in the first 7 days after vaccination, mainly manifested in fever; another placebo subject reported grade 3 fever, but it was self-limiting And have recovered, these adverse reactions are mild or moderate.
Kexing's preliminary statistical analysis of the third phase of clinical research data published by Kexing on its website stated that as of December 16 last year, there were more than 12,000 medical staff aged 18 and over in Brazil participating in the trial study, 14 days apart.
The protective effect of two doses of vaccine is: the protective effect of all new coronary cases including mild cases that do not require medical treatment is 50.
65%, and the protective effect of new coronary cases with obvious symptoms and requiring medical treatment is 83.
70%.
The protective effect of severe and death cases is 100.
00%.
In the Phase 3 clinical trial in Turkey, more than 900 high-risk medical staff between 18 and 59 years old and more than 6,400 general persons at normal risk participated.
As of December 23 last year, more than 1,300 people had completed two doses of vaccination.
The results showed that 14 days after the two doses of vaccination, the protective effect of preventing the virus was 91.
25%.
On February 3, "The Lancet Infectious Diseases" (Infectious Diseases) published online the results of the Kellyford vaccine in the phase I/II clinical study for healthy people aged 60 and over.
Among them, more than 400 healthy people aged 60 and above will be vaccinated in Hebei in 2020.
Among them, 72 people participated in the first phase of the trial.
After two doses of the vaccine, the antibody production ratio was 95.
7% to 100%; and the 350 people who participated in the second phase of the trial had an antibody ratio of 90.
7% to 99%.
The results also show that the Kerrlive vaccine has good safety and immunogenicity for healthy people aged 60 and over, which is comparable to the results of healthy people aged 18-59.
At present, Kerlaifu vaccine is 18-59 years old in China, but some overseas countries have expanded this vaccine to the elderly.
Reference: Susceptibility of Circulating SARS-CoV-2 Variants to Neutralization, April 6, 2021, DOI: 10.
1056/NEJMc2103022 Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBIBP-CorV: a randomised, double-blind, placebo- controlled, phase 1/2 trial,DOI:https://doi.
org/10.
1016/S1473-3099(20)30831-8
