Dataset Information

Safety and efficacy assessment of two new leprosy skin test antigens: randomized double blind clinical study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

New tools are required for the diagnosis of pre-symptomatic leprosy towards further reduction of disease burden and its associated reactions. To address this need, two new skin test antigens were developed to assess safety and efficacy in human trials.

Methods

A Phase I safety trial was first conducted in a non-endemic region for leprosy (U.S.A.). Healthy non-exposed subjects (n = 10) received three titrated doses (2.5 µg, 1.0 µg and 0.1 µg) of MLSA-LAM (n = 5) or MLCwA (n = 5) and control antigens [Rees MLSA (1.0 µg) and saline]. A randomized double blind Phase II safety and efficacy trial followed in an endemic region for leprosy (Nepal), but involved only the 1.0 µg (high dose) and 0.1 µg (low dose) of each antigen; Tuberculin PPD served as a control antigen. This Phase II safety and efficacy trial consisted of three Stages: Stage A and B studies were an expansion of Phase I involving 10 and 90 subjects respectively, and Stage C was then conducted in two parts (high dose and low dose), each enrolling 80 participants: 20 borderline lepromatous/lepromatous (BL/LL) leprosy patients, 20 borderline tuberculoid/tuberculoid (BT/TT) leprosy patients, 20 household contacts of leprosy patients (HC), and 20 tuberculosis (TB) patients. The primary outcome measure for the skin test was delayed type hypersensitivity induration.

Findings

In the small Phase I safety trial, reactions were primarily against the 2.5 µg dose of both antigens and Rees control antigen, which were then excluded from subsequent studies. In the Phase II, Stage A/B ramped-up safety study, 26% of subjects (13 of 50) showed induration against the high dose of each antigen, and 4% (2 of 50) reacted to the low dose of MLSA-LAM. Phase II, Stage C safety and initial efficacy trial showed that both antigens at the low dose exhibited low sensitivity at 20% and 25% in BT/TT leprosy patients, but high specificity at 100% and 95% compared to TB patients. The high dose of both antigens showed lower specificity (70% and 60%) and sensitivity (10% and 15%). BL/LL leprosy patients were anergic to the leprosy antigens.

Interpretation

MLSA-LAM and MLCwA at both high (1.0 µg) and low (0.1 µg) doses were found to be safe for use in humans without known exposure to leprosy and in target populations. At a sensitivity rate of 20-25% these antigens are not suitable as a skin test for the detection of the early stages of leprosy infection; however, the degree of specificity is impressive given the presence of cross-reactive antigens in these complex native M. leprae preparations.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01920750 (Phase I), NCT00128193 (Phase II).

SUBMITTER: Rivoire BL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4038488 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Safety and efficacy assessment of two new leprosy skin test antigens: randomized double blind clinical study.

Rivoire Becky L BL Groathouse Nathan A NA TerLouw Stephen S Neupane Kapil Dev KD Ranjit Chaman C Sapkota Bishwa Raj BR Khadge Saraswoti S Kunwar Chhatra B CB Macdonald Murdo M Hawksworth Rachel R Thapa Min B MB Hagge Deanna A DA Tibbals Melinda M Smith Carol C Dube Tina T She Dewei D Wolff Mark M Zhou Eric E Makhene Mamodikoe M Mason Robin R Sizemore Christine C Brennan Patrick J PJ

PLoS neglected tropical diseases 20140529 5

<h4>Background</h4>New tools are required for the diagnosis of pre-symptomatic leprosy towards further reduction of disease burden and its associated reactions. To address this need, two new skin test antigens were developed to assess safety and efficacy in human trials.<h4>Methods</h4>A Phase I safety trial was first conducted in a non-endemic region for leprosy (U.S.A.). Healthy non-exposed subjects (n = 10) received three titrated doses (2.5 µg, 1.0 µg and 0.1 µg) of MLSA-LAM (n = 5) or MLCwA ...[more]

PMID: 24874401

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDelafloxacin is an investigational anionic fluoroquinolone in development for oral or intravenous administration for the treatment of infections caused by Gram-positive (including MRSA), Gram-negative, atypical and anaerobic organisms.ObjectivesTo establish the non-inferiority of delafloxacin compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and to compare the safety of the two antimicrobials.Patients and methodsA Phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled study with 660 patients compared delafloxacin 300 mg or vancomycin 15 mg/kg plus aztreonam 2 g each administered twice daily intravenously for 5-14 days. Non-inferiority was evaluated by objective response (≥20% erythema reduction) at 48-72 h after initiation of study drug, investigator subjective assessment of outcome and microbiological responses. Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01811732. EudraCT number: 2012-001767-71.ResultsIn the ITT analysis set, the objective response was 78.2% in the delafloxacin arm and 80.9% in the vancomycin/aztreonam arm (mean treatment difference, -2.6%; 95% CI, -8.78% to 3.57%). Investigator-assessed cure was similar between the two groups at follow-up (52.0% versus 50.5%) and late follow-up (70.4% versus 66.6%). Bacterial eradication of MRSA was 100% and 98.5% in the delafloxacin group and the vancomycin/aztreonam group, respectively. Frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events in the delafloxacin and vancomycin/aztreonam groups was similar. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to study drug discontinuation were higher in the vancomycin/aztreonam group compared with the delafloxacin group (4.3% versus 0.9%).ConclusionsDelafloxacin, an anionic fluoroquinolone, was statistically non-inferior to vancomycin/aztreonam at 48-72 h following the start of therapy and was well tolerated as monotherapy in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Project description:To assess the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) belimumab in patients with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE).Patients with moderate-to-severe SLE (score of ?8 on the Safety of Estrogens in Lupus Erythematosus National Assessment [SELENA] version of the SLE Disease Activity Index [SLEDAI]) were randomized 2:1 to receive weekly SC belimumab 200 mg or placebo by prefilled syringe in addition to standard SLE therapy for 52 weeks. The primary end point was the SLE Responder Index (SRI4) at week 52. Secondary end points were reduction in the corticosteroid dosage and time to severe flare. Safety was assessed according to the adverse events (AEs) reported and the laboratory test results.Of 839 patients randomized, 836 (556 in the belimumab group and 280 in the placebo group) received treatment. A total of 159 patients withdrew before the end of the study. At entry, mean SELENA-SLEDAI scores were 10.5 in the belimumab group and 10.3 in the placebo group. More patients who received belimumab were SRI4 responders than those who received placebo (61.4% versus 48.4%; odds ratio [OR] 1.68 [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 1.25-2.25]; P?=?0.0006). In the belimumab group, both time to and risk of severe flare were improved (median 171.0 days versus 118.0 days; hazard ratio 0.51 [95% CI 0.35-0.74]; P?=?0.0004), and more patients were able to reduce their corticosteroid dosage by ?25% (to ?7.5 mg/day) during weeks 40-52 (18.2% versus 11.9%; OR 1.65 [95% CI 0.95-2.84]; P?=?0.0732), compared with placebo. AE incidence was comparable between treatment groups; serious AEs were reported by 10.8% of patients taking belimumab and 15.7% of those taking placebo. A worsening of IgG hypoglobulinemia by ?2 grades occurred in 0.9% of patients taking belimumab and 1.4% of those taking placebo.In patients with moderate-to-severe SLE, weekly SC doses of belimumab 200 mg plus standard SLE therapy significantly improved their SRI4 response, decreased severe disease flares as compared with placebo, and had a safety profile similar to placebo plus standard SLE therapy.

Project description:BackgroundObservational data and non-human primate challenge studies suggest that cell-mediated immune responses might provide control of HIV replication. The Step Study directly assessed the efficacy of a cell-mediated immunity vaccine to protect against HIV-1 infection or change in early plasma HIV-1 levels.MethodsWe undertook a double-blind, phase II, test-of-concept study at 34 sites in North America, the Caribbean, South America, and Australia. We randomly assigned 3000 HIV-1-seronegative participants by computer-generated assignments to receive three injections of MRKAd5 HIV-1 gag/pol/nef vaccine (n=1494) or placebo (n=1506). Randomisation was prestratified by sex, adenovirus type 5 (Ad5) antibody titre at baseline, and study site. Primary objective was a reduction in HIV-1 acquisition rates (tested every 6 months) or a decrease in HIV-1 viral-load setpoint (early plasma HIV-1 RNA measured 3 months after HIV-1 diagnosis). Analyses were per protocol and modified intention to treat. The study was stopped early because it unexpectedly met the prespecified futility boundaries at the first interim analysis. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00095576.FindingsIn a prespecified interim analysis in participants with baseline Ad5 antibody titre 200 or less, 24 (3%) of 741 vaccine recipients became HIV-1 infected versus 21 (3%) of 762 placebo recipients (hazard ratio [HR] 1.2 [95% CI 0.6-2.2]). All but one infection occurred in men. The corresponding geometric mean plasma HIV-1 RNA was comparable in infected male vaccine and placebo recipients (4.61 vs 4.41 log(10) copies per mL, one tailed p value for potential benefit 0.66). The vaccine elicited interferon-gamma ELISPOT responses in 75% (267) of the 25% random sample of all vaccine recipients (including both low and high Ad5 antibody titres) on whose specimens this testing was done (n=354). In exploratory analyses of all study volunteers, irrespective of baseline Ad5 antibody titre, the HR of HIV-1 infection between vaccine and placebo recipients was higher in Ad5 seropositive men (HR 2.3 [95% CI 1.2-4.3]) and uncircumcised men (3.8 [1.5-9.3]), but was not increased in Ad5 seronegative (1.0 [0.5-1.9]) or circumcised (1.0 [0.6-1.7]) men.InterpretationThis cell-mediated immunity vaccine did not prevent HIV-1 infection or reduce early viral level. Mechanisms for insufficient efficacy of the vaccine and the increased HIV-1 infection rates in subgroups of vaccine recipients are being explored.

Dataset Information

Safety and efficacy assessment of two new leprosy skin test antigens: randomized double blind clinical study.

Background

Methods

Findings

Interpretation

Trial registration

Publications

Safety and efficacy assessment of two new leprosy skin test antigens: randomized double blind clinical study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets