Vaccine development has never lacked for innovation, although as
a necessarily conservative industry, only a small number of evolutionary technologies
have so far been exploited in large-scale “routine” childhood and adult vaccines.
This wealth of background ingenuity, along with experience gained
in earlier pandemics (SARS, MERS) and the ongoing quest for better influenza
vaccines, has allowed COVID-19 vaccine development to get off to a flying
start, with an impressive number of candidates incorporating both established
and novel technologies now under laboratory evaluation, and with a few in, or very
close to, first in human studies.
A high-profile front runner is Moderna’s mRNA-1273, comprising
synthetic mRNA encoding COVID-19 S (“spike”) protein, delivered in a lipid
formulation which assists in getting the mRNA into cells and to ribosomes,
where it’s translated into immunising protein. Dosing is now underway in
healthy adults, with safety and immunogenicity read-out anticipated by mid-June
next year.
However, on the 23rd March, Moderna raised the possibility of being
able to make the vaccine available to essential healthcare personnel before
year end under an emergency provision.
Another mRNA player, CureVac, encouraged by early results from
an mRNA rabies vaccine study, plans to enter its own COVID-19 mRNA candidate into
trials by mid-year. CureVac hopes that the vaccine might achieve useful
responses at the same very low doses used in the rabies study, allowing it to meet
early demand from its existing manufacturing capability. Several other mRNA
vaccine candidates under development within academia and industry (from BioNTech,
Arcturus, Fosun and Pfizer) are at earlier stages of preclinical development
and include a nasally administered vaccine encoding highly conserved COVID-19
proteins (eTheRNA consortium).
A Chinese developed non-replicating viral vector vaccine, Ad5-nCoV
(CanSino Biological and the Beijing Institute of Biotechnology) will shortly
enter the clinic. This
exploits an engineered adenovirus (the workhorse of gene therapy) to deliver DNA
encoding coronavirus proteins. The technology has a track record, being the
same as used in the first Ebola vaccine to receive regulatory approval.
Adenovirus-based vaccines are not without their problems,
but as a relatively well-understood platform, it’s no surprise that several companies
and institutes are pursuing non-replicating adenovirus candidate vaccines,
including J&J, GeoVax, Altimmune, Greffex and Vaccitech. An arguably riskier
route is the use of replicating viral vectors such as measles (Institute Pasteur)
and horsepox viruses (Tonix Pharma).
DNA delivery does not require a living carrier, replicating
or otherwise. Inovio is applying its electroporation to push COVID-19 protein
encoding DNA through the skin. Zydus Cadilla is also looking at a DNA, although
has not disclosed how the encoding plasmid might be delivered.
Protein subunit vaccines are well-understood, with several
candidates developed in response to the SARS pandemic. Importantly, the manufacture
of protein subunit vaccines is well-established and can be accomplished to high
yields in in standard bacteria and yeast expression systems, although several
COVID-19 candidates involve insect cell (Sanofi, ExpreS2ion) or plant-based
manufacture (IBio/CC Farming).
And, in the midst of all this experimental vaccine tech, let’s
not ignore the old school approaches of formalin-inactivated virus (Sinovac)
and attenuated live vaccines (Codagenix/Serum Institute of India) which have
proved their worth in existing viral vaccines.
Nor should we ignore the slog ahead. The correlates of
protection for COVID-19, that is what should we be looking for with respect to the quality and magnitude of a neutralising antibody response, are unknown: analysis of the immune response
from recovering (and infected but asymptomatic) individuals may shed much needed light. The phenomenon of “antibody dependent enhancement” (ADE), where the virus hijacks the host antibody response to infect certain cell types has been observed in both non-SARS human and animal coronavirus
infection. Early SARS vaccine development pointed up a potential risk of severe hypersensitivity reactions in immunised animals when challenged with virus.
Despite
the pressing need to at least be able to protect those on the front line, history
dictates caution. A possible silver lining of the pandemic is that revolutionary approaches such as mRNA vaccination may prove their worth much earlier than would normally be the case. Vaccine development failures, and there will be many, will, at hte very least, will add to preparedness for the next pandemic by eliminating blind alleys.
With a fair wind, we might see limited release of a vaccine
within 18 months. Until then, and with the gradual development of what will hopefully
be protective natural immunity, we all need to accept that lockdown and social
distancing save lives and takes some of the pressure off our healthcare systems.