Heterologous CoronaVac plus Ad5-nCOV versus homologous CoronaVac vaccination among elderly: a phase 4, non-inferiority, randomized study

Importance People over 60 developed less protection after two doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine than younger people. Heterologous vaccination might provide greater immunity and protection against variants of concern. Objective To assess the safety and immunogenicity of a heterologous immunization with an adenovirus type 5-vectored vaccine (Convidecia) among elderly who were primed with an inactivated vaccine (CoronaVac) previously. Design An observer-blind, randomized (1:1) trial, conducted from August 26 to November 13, 2021. Setting A single center in Jiangsu Province, China. Participants 299 participants aged 60 years and older, of them 199 primed with two doses of CoronaVac in the past 3-6 months and 100 primed with one dose of CoronaVac in the past 1-2 months. Intervention Convidecia or CoronaVac as boosting dose Main Outcomes and Measures Geometric mean titers (GMTs) of neutralizing antibodies against wild-type SARS-CoV-2, and Delta and Omicron variants 14 days post boosting, and adverse reactions within 28 days. Results In the three-dose regimen cohort (n=199; mean (SD) age, 66.7 (4.2) years; 74 (37.2%) female), 99 and 100 received a third dose of Convidecia (group A) and CoronaVac (group B), respectively. In the two-dose regimen cohort (n=100; mean (SD) age, 70.5 (6.0) years; 49 (49%) female), 50 and 50 received a second dose of Convidecia (group C) and CoronaVac (group D), respectively. GMTs of neutralizing antibodies against wild-type SARS-CoV-2 at day 14 were 286.4 (95% CI: 244.6, 335.2) in group A and 48.2 (95% CI: 39.5, 58.7) in group B, with GMT ratio of 6.2 (95% CI: 4.7, 8.1), and 70.9 (95% CI: 49.5, 101.7) in group C and 9.3 (95% CI: 6.2, 13.9) in group D, with GMT ratio of 7.6 (95% CI: 4.1, 14.1). There was a 6.3-fold (GMTs, 45.9 vs 7.3) and 7.5-fold (32.9 vs 4.4) increase in neutralizing antibodies against Delta and Omicron variants in group A, respectively, compared with group B. However, there was no significant difference between group C and group D. Both heterologous and homologous booster immunizations were safe and well tolerated. Conclusions and Relevance Heterologous prime-boost regimens with CoronaVac and Convidecia induced strong neutralizing antibodies in elderly, which was superior to that induced by the homologous boost, without increasing safety concerns. Trial Registration [ClinicalTrials.gov][1] [NCT04952727][2] Question Does a heterologous immunization with recombinant adenovirus type 5-vectored vaccine (Convidecia) produced a non-inferior or superior response of neutralizing antibodies among elderly primed with two doses of inactivated COVID-19 vaccine (CoronaVac), compared to the homologous boosting Findings In this randomized clinical trial, a heterologous third dose of Convidecia resulted in a 6.2-fold (geometric mean titers: 286.4 vs 48.2), 6.3-fold (45.9 vs 7.3) and 7.5-fold (32.9 vs 4.4) increase in neutralizing antibodies against wild-type strain, Delta and Omicron variants 14 days post boosting, respectively, compared to the homologous boost with CoronaVac Meaning Heterologous prime-boost regimens with CoronaVac and Convidecia induced strong neutralizing antibodies in elderly, which was superior to that induced by the homologous boosting. ### Competing Interest Statement Jingxin Li reports grants from National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 82173584) and Jiangsu Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars Program. Fengcai Zhu reports grants from Jiangsu Provincial Key Research and Development Program (grant number BE2021738). Jinbo Gou, Tao Zhu, Haitao Huang, Xue Wang, Peng Wan are employees of CanSino Biologics. All the other authors declare no competing interests. ### Clinical Trial Clinical [Trials.gov][3] [NCT04952727][2] ### Funding Statement This work is funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (Jingxin Li), and Jiangsu Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars Program (Jingxin Li), and Jiangsu Provincial Key Research and Development Program (Fengcai Zhu). ### Author Declarations I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained. Yes The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below: The ethics committee of the Jiangsu Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention [JSJK2021-A008-01] I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals. Yes I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance). Yes I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable. Yes All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors [1]: http://ClinicalTrials.gov [2]: /lookup/external-ref?link_type=CLINTRIALGOV&access_num=NCT04952727&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2022%2F06%2F06%2F2022.06.03.22275983.atom [3]: https://Trials.gov