Dataset Information

Priming with a simplified intradermal HIV-1 DNA vaccine regimen followed by boosting with recombinant HIV-1 MVA vaccine is safe and immunogenic: a phase IIa randomized clinical trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Intradermal priming with HIV-1 DNA plasmids followed by HIV-1MVA boosting induces strong and broad cellular and humoral immune responses. In our previous HIVIS-03 trial, we used 5 injections with 2 pools of HIV-DNA at separate sites for each priming immunization. The present study explores whether HIV-DNA priming can be simplified by reducing the number of DNA injections and administration of combined versus separated plasmid pools.

Methods

In this phase IIa, randomized trial, priming was performed using 5 injections of HIV-DNA, 1000 μg total dose, (3 Env and 2 Gag encoding plasmids) compared to two "simplified" regimens of 2 injections of HIV-DNA, 600 μg total dose, of Env- and Gag-encoding plasmid pools with each pool either administered separately or combined. HIV-DNA immunizations were given intradermally at weeks 0, 4, and 12. Boosting was performed intramuscularly with 108 pfu HIV-MVA at weeks 30 and 46.

Results

129 healthy Tanzanian participants were enrolled. There were no differences in adverse events between the groups. The proportion of IFN-γ ELISpot responders to Gag and/or Env peptides after the second HIV-MVA boost did not differ significantly between the groups primed with 2 injections of combined HIV-DNA pools, 2 injections with separated pools, and 5 injections with separated pools (90%, 97% and 97%). There were no significant differences in the magnitude of Gag and/or Env IFN-γ ELISpot responses, in CD4+ and CD8+ T cell responses measured as IFN-γ/IL-2 production by intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) or in response rates and median titers for binding antibodies to Env gp160 between study groups.

Conclusions

A simplified intradermal vaccination regimen with 2 injections of a total of 600 μg with combined HIV-DNA plasmids primed cellular responses as efficiently as the standard regimen of 5 injections of a total of 1000 μg with separated plasmid pools after boosting twice with HIV-MVA.

Trial registration

World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform PACTR2010050002122368.

SUBMITTER: Munseri PJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4398367 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe need for economical rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) is increasing in developing countries. Implementation of the two currently approved economical intradermal (ID) vaccine regimens is restricted due to confusion over different vaccines, regimens and dosages, lack of confidence in intradermal technique, and pharmaceutical regulations. We therefore compared a simplified 4-site economical PEP regimen with standard methods.MethodsTwo hundred and fifty-four volunteers were randomly allocated to a single blind controlled trial. Each received purified vero cell rabies vaccine by one of four PEP regimens: the currently accepted 2-site ID; the 8-site regimen using 0.05 ml per ID site; a new 4-site ID regimen (on day 0, approximately 0.1 ml at 4 ID sites, using the whole 0.5 ml ampoule of vaccine; on day 7, 0.1 ml ID at 2 sites and at one site on days 28 and 90); or the standard 5-dose intramuscular regimen. All ID regimens required the same total amount of vaccine, 60% less than the intramuscular method. Neutralising antibody responses were measured five times over a year in 229 people, for whom complete data were available.FindingsAll ID regimens showed similar immunogenicity. The intramuscular regimen gave the lowest geometric mean antibody titres. Using the rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test, some sera had unexpectedly high antibody levels that were not attributable to previous vaccination. The results were confirmed using the fluorescent antibody virus neutralisation method.ConclusionsThis 4-site PEP regimen proved as immunogenic as current regimens, and has the advantages of requiring fewer clinic visits, being more practicable, and having a wider margin of safety, especially in inexperienced hands, than the 2-site regimen. It is more convenient than the 8-site method, and can be used economically with vaccines formulated in 1.0 or 0.5 ml ampoules. The 4-site regimen now meets all requirements of immunogenicity for PEP and can be introduced without further studies.Trial registrationControlled-Trials.com ISRCTN 30087513.

Project description:BackgroundWe compared safety and immunogenicity of intradermal (ID) vaccination with and without electroporation (EP) in a phase I randomized placebo-controlled trial of an HIV-DNA prime HIV-MVA boost vaccine in healthy Swedish volunteers.MethodsHIV-DNA plasmids encoding HIV-1 genes gp160 subtypes A, B and C; Rev B; Gag A and B and RTmut B were given ID at weeks 0, 6 and 12 in a dose of 0.6 mg. Twenty-five volunteers received vaccine using a needle-free device (ZetaJet) with (n=16) or without (n=9) ID EP (Dermavax). Five volunteers were placebo recipients. Boosting with recombinant MVA-CMDR expressing HIV-1 Env, Gag, Pol of CRF01_AE (HIV-MVA) or placebo was performed at weeks 24 and 40. Nine of the vaccinees received a subtype C CN54 gp140 protein boost together with HIV-MVA.ResultsThe ID/EP delivery was very well tolerated. After three HIV-DNA immunizations, no statistically significant difference was seen in the IFN-? ELISpot response rate to Gag between HIV-DNA ID/EP recipients (5/15, 33%) and HIV-DNA ID recipients (1/7, 14%, p=0.6158). The first HIV-MVA or HIV-MVA+gp140 vaccination increased the IFN-? ELISpot response rate to 18/19 (95%). CD4+ and/or CD8+ T cell responses to Gag or Env were demonstrable in 94% of vaccinees. A balanced CD4+ and CD8+ T cell response was noted, with 78% and 71% responders, respectively. IFN-? and IL-2 dominated the CD4+ T cell response to Gag and Env. The CD8+ response to Gag was broader with expression of IFN-?, IL-2, MIP-1? and/or CD107. No differences were seen between DNA vaccine groups. Binding antibodies were induced after the second HIV-MVA+/-gp140 in 93% of vaccinees to subtype C Env, with the highest titers among EP/gp140 recipients.ConclusionIntradermal electroporation of HIV-DNA was well tolerated. Strong cell- and antibody-mediated immune responses were elicited by the HIV-DNA prime and HIV-MVA boosting regimen, with or without intradermal electroporation use.Trial registrationInternational Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) 60284968.

Project description:BackgroundThe immune parameters of HIV/AIDS vaccine candidates that might be relevant in protection against HIV-1 infection are still undefined. The highly attenuated poxvirus strain MVA is one of the most promising vectors to be use as HIV-1 vaccine. We have previously described a recombinant MVA expressing HIV-1 Env, Gag, Pol and Nef antigens from clade B (referred as MVA-B), that induced HIV-1-specific immune responses in different animal models and gene signatures in human dendritic cells (DCs) with immunoregulatory function.Methodology/principal findingsIn an effort to characterize in more detail the immunogenic profile of MVA-B and to improve its immunogenicity we have generated a new vector lacking two genes (A41L and B16R), known to counteract host immune responses by blocking the action of CC-chemokines and of interleukin 1beta, respectively (referred as MVA-B DeltaA41L/DeltaB16R). A DNA prime/MVA boost immunization protocol was used to compare the adaptive and memory HIV-1 specific immune responses induced in mice by the parental MVA-B and by the double deletion mutant MVA-B DeltaA41L/DeltaB16R. Flow cytometry analysis revealed that both vectors triggered HIV-1-specific CD4(+) and CD8(+) T cells, with the CD8(+) T-cell compartment responsible for >91.9% of the total HIV-1 responses in both immunization groups. However, MVA-B DeltaA41L/DeltaB16R enhanced the magnitude and polyfunctionality of the HIV-1-specific CD4(+) and CD8(+) T-cell immune responses. HIV-1-specific CD4(+) T-cell responses were polyfunctional and preferentially Env-specific in both immunization groups. Significantly, while MVA-B induced preferentially Env-specific CD8(+) T-cell responses, MVA-B DeltaA41L/DeltaB16R induced more GPN-specific CD8(+) T-cell responses, with an enhanced polyfunctional pattern. Both vectors were capable of producing similar levels of antibodies against Env.Conclusions/significanceThese findings revealed that MVA-B and MVA-B DeltaA41L/DeltaB16R induced in mice robust, polyfunctional and durable T-cell responses to HIV-1 antigens, but the double deletion mutant showed enhanced magnitude and quality of HIV-1 adaptive and memory responses. Our observations are relevant in the immune evaluation of MVA-B and on improvements of MVA vectors as HIV-1 vaccines.

Project description:BACKGROUND:We conducted a phase I/II randomized placebo-controlled trial with the aim of exploring whether priming with a low intradermal dose of a multiclade, multigene HIV-1 DNA vaccine could improve the immunogenicity of the same vaccine given intramuscularly prior to boosting with a heterologous HIV-1 MVA among healthy adults in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. METHODS:Sixty HIV-uninfected volunteers were randomized to receive DNA plasmid vaccine 1mg intradermally (id), n=20, or 3.8mg intramuscularly (im), n=20, or placebo, n=20, using a needle-free injection device. DNA plasmids encoding HIV-1 genes gp160 subtype A, B, C; rev B; p17/p24 gag A, B and Rtmut B were given at weeks 0, 4 and 12. Recombinant MVA (10(8)pfu) expressing HIV-1 Env, Gag, Pol of CRF01_AE or placebo was administered im at month 9 and 21. RESULTS:The vaccines were well tolerated. Two weeks after the third HIV-DNA injection, 22/38 (58%) vaccinees had IFN-? ELISpot responses to Gag. Two weeks after the first HIV-MVA boost all 35 (100%) vaccinees responded to Gag and 31 (89%) to Env. Two to four weeks after the second HIV-MVA boost, 28/29 (97%) vaccinees had IFN-? ELISpot responses, 27 (93%) to Gag and 23 (79%) to Env. The id-primed recipients had significantly higher responses to Env than im recipients. Intracellular cytokine staining for Gag-specific IFN-?/IL-2 production showed both CD8(+) and CD4(+) T cell responses. All vaccinees had HIV-specific lymphoproliferative responses. All vaccinees reacted in diagnostic HIV serological tests and 26/29 (90%) had antibodies against gp160 after the second HIV-MVA boost. Furthermore, while all of 29 vaccinee sera were negative for neutralizing antibodies against clade B, C and CRF01_AE pseudoviruses in the TZM-bl neutralization assay, in a PBMC assay, the response rate ranged from 31% to 83% positives, depending upon the clade B or CRF01_AE virus tested. CONCLUSIONS:This vaccine approach is safe and highly immunogenic. Low dose, id HIV-DNA priming elicited higher and broader cell-mediated immune responses to Env after HIV-MVA boost compared to a higher HIV-DNA priming dose given im. Three HIV-DNA priming immunizations followed by two HIV-MVA boosts efficiently induced Env-antibody responses.