Dataset Information

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Novel Intranasal Influenza Vaccine (NasoVAX): A Phase 2 Randomized, Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Annual influenza vaccination greatly reduces morbidity and mortality, but effectiveness remains sub-optimal. Weaknesses of current vaccines include low effectiveness against mismatched strains, lack of mucosal and other effective tissue-resident immune responses, weak cellular immune responses, and insufficiently durable immune responses. The safety and immunogenicity of NasoVAX, a monovalent intranasal influenza vaccine based on a replication-deficient adenovirus type 5 platform, were evaluated in a placebo-controlled single ascending-dose study. Sixty healthy adults (18-49 years) received a single intranasal dose of 1×10⁹ viral particles (vp), 1 × 10¹⁰ vp, or 1 × 10¹¹ vp of NasoVAX or placebo. NasoVAX was well-tolerated and elicited robust influenza-specific systemic and mucosal immune responses. The highest NasoVAX dose and the approved Fluzone^® influenza vaccine elicited comparable hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) geometric mean titers (152.8 vs. 293.4) and microneutralization (MN) geometric mean titers (142.5 vs. 162.8), with NasoVAX HAI titers maintained more than 1-year on average following a single dose. Hemagglutinin-specific T cells responses were also documented in peripheral mononuclear cell (PBMC) preparations. Consistent with the intranasal route of administration, NasoVAX elicited antigen-specific mucosal IgA responses in the nasopharyngeal cavity with an increase of approximately 2-fold over baseline GMT at the mid- and high-doses. In summary, NasoVAX appeared safe and elicited a broad immune response, including humoral, cellular, and mucosal immunity, with no impact of baseline anti-adenovirus antibody at the most immunogenic dose.

SUBMITTER: Tasker S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8000446 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Two phylogenetic lineages of influenza B virus coexist and circulate in the human population (B/Yamagata and B/Victoria) but only one B-strain is included in each seasonal vaccine. Mismatch regularly occurs between the recommended and circulating B-strain. Inclusion of both lineages in vaccines may offer better protection against influenza.This study (NCT00714285) assessed the immunogenicity and safety of two candidate quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIV) containing two A- and two B-strains (one from each lineage) in adults (18-60 years). Subjects were randomized and stratified by age to receive either QIV (non-adjuvanted or low-dose adjuvanted [LD QIV-AS]) or trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV, non-adjuvanted or low-dose adjuvanted [LD TIV-AS]), N?=?105 in all treatment groups. The study evaluated the statistical non-inferiority of the immunological response elicited by QIV and LD QIV-AS versus TIV and LD TIV-AS and the statistical superiority of the response elicited by the quadrivalent vaccines against the B-strain (B/Jiangsu) not included in the TIV.Pre-defined non-inferiority and superiority criteria were reached for both QIVs compared to the TIVs. On Day 21 in all vaccine groups SCRs were ?54.8%, SPRs ?88.5% and SCFs ?5.4 for the A strains and B strain included in all vaccines (B/Malaysia). This fulfilled the European (CHMP) and the US (CBER) licensing criteria for the assessment of influenza vaccines in adults (CHMP criteria: SCR?>?40%, SPR?>?70%, SCF?>?2; CBER criteria: LL of 95% CI for SPR???70% or SCR???40%). Only the QIVs met the CHMP and CBER criteria for the B/Jiangsu strain. In the QIV and LD-QIV-AS groups, the SCFs were 9.1 and 8.1, respectively and the SPRs were 98.1% and 95.2%, whereas for the TIV and LD-TIV-AS groups, the SCFs were 2.3 and 2.5, respectively, and the SPRs were 75.0% and 63.8%, with the LLs of the 95% CI <70% for SPR and <40% for SCR.Addition of a fourth strain did not impact the immune response elicited by the three original strains contained in the TIV. A clear immunological benefit was seen with the QIV formulation for the second B-strain, indicating that quadrivalent vaccines could provide broader protection against influenza.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00714285.

Project description:BackgroundAlthough the killed whole-cell and live attenuated plague vaccine have been licensed, they are rarely used today because of toxicities, limited evidence of efficacy against plague, poor immune persistence required booster immunization every year, and limited commercial availability. This study was a randomized phase 2a clinical trial aimed to evaluating the immunogenicity and safety of a novel subunit plague vaccine.Methods240 healthy adults aged 18-55 y were enrolled and randomly assigned at a ratio of 1:1 to receive 2 doses of 15 or 30 mcg vaccine at a 28-day interval between doses. Blood samples were collected at day 0, 28 and 56. Adverse events were collected during the first 28 d after each vaccination. Serious Adverse Event was observed throughout the study period.Results239 participants received the first dose at day 0 and 238 received the second dose at day 28. Antibodies to envelope antigen faction 1 (F1) and recombinant virulence antigen (rV) were increased at day 28, and boosted significantly at day 56. For anti-F1 antibodies, geometric mean titer (GMT) and geometric mean fold increase (GMFI) were significantly higher in 30 mcg group than in the 15 mcg group(each P1< 0.05 at day 28 and each P1< 0.001 at day 56), with similar seroconversion rate of antibodies between 15 and 30 mcg group at both of the 2 time points. For anti-rV antibodies, seroconversion rate at day 28 in 30 mcg group was higher than that in 15 mcg group. However, GMT and GMFI of anti-rV antibodies were increased to approximately the same levels in the 2 groups. Similar booster immune response was also noticed in both groups at day 56. The injections were well tolerated, with mainly mild or moderate local and systemic adverse reactions (lower than grad 3). The proportion of pain at injection site was higher in 30 mcg group. None of SAEs were reported during 56 d.ConclusionThe plague vaccine comprised of F1 and rV antigens showed good safety and immunogenicity in adults aged 18-55 y old. The data show that the 30 mcg formulation is generally more immunogenic than the 15 mcg formulation, and represents the preferred formulation for further clinical development. It will be important to evaluate the long-term efficacy for appropriate formulations of the plague subunit vaccine.

Project description:BackgroundTwo antigenically distinct influenza B lineages have co-circulated since the 1980s, yet inactivated trivalent influenza vaccines (TIVs) include strains of influenza A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and only one influenza B from either the Victoria or Yamagata lineage. This means that exposure to B-lineage viruses mismatched to the TIV is frequent, reducing vaccine protection. Formulations including both influenza B lineages could improve protection against circulating influenza B viruses. We assessed a candidate inactivated quadrivalent influenza vaccine (QIV) containing both B lineages versus TIV in adults in stable health.MethodsA total of 4659 adults were randomized 5:5:5:5:3 to receive one dose of QIV (one of three lots) or a TIV containing either a B/Victoria or B/Yamagata strain. Hemagglutination-inhibition assays were performed pre-vaccination and 21-days after vaccination. Lot-to-lot consistency of QIV was assessed based on geometric mean titers (GMT). For QIV versus TIV, non-inferiority against the three shared strains was demonstrated if the 95% confidence interval (CI) upper limit for the GMT ratio was ≤1.5 and for the seroconversion difference was ≤10.0%; superiority of QIV versus TIV for the alternate B lineage was demonstrated if the 95% CI lower limit for the GMT ratio was > 1.0 and for the seroconversion difference was > 0%. Reactogenicity and safety profile of each vaccine were assessed. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01204671.ResultsConsistent immunogenicity was demonstrated for the three QIV lots. QIV was non-inferior to TIV for the shared vaccine strains, and was superior for the added alternate-lineage B strains. QIV elicited robust immune responses against all four vaccine strains; the seroconversion rates were 77.5% (A/H1N1), 71.5% (A/H3N2), 58.1% (B/Victoria), and 61.7% (B/Yamagata). The reactogenicity and safety profile of QIV was consistent with TIV.ConclusionsQIV provided superior immunogenicity for the additional B strain compared with TIV, without interfering with antibody responses to the three shared antigens. The additional antigen did not appear to alter the safety profile of QIV compared with TIV. This suggests that the candidate QIV is a viable alternative to TIV for use in adults, and could potentially improve protection against influenza B.Trial registrationClinical Trials.gov: NCT01204671/114269.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of three different doses (5, 25 and 50 µg) of the novel antituberculous vaccine RUTI compared to placebo in subjects with latent tuberculosis infection.Methods and findingsDouble-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase II Clinical Trial (95 patients randomized). Three different RUTI doses and placebo were tested, randomized both in HIV-positive (n = 47) and HIV-negative subjects (n = 48), after completion of one month isoniazid (INH) pre-vaccination. Each subject received two vaccine administrations, 28 Days apart. Five patients withdrew and 90 patients completed the study. Assessment of safety showed no deaths during study. Two subjects had serious adverse events one had a retinal detachment while taking INH and was not randomized and the other had a severe local injection site abscess on each arm and was hospitalized; causality was assessed as very likely and by the end of the study the outcome had resolved. All the patients except 5 (21%) patients of the placebo group (3 HIV+ and 2 HIV-) reported at least one adverse event (AE) during the study. The most frequently occurring AEs among RUTI recipients were (% in HIV+/-): injection site reactions [erythema (91/92), induration (94/92), local nodules (46/25), local pain (66/75), sterile abscess (6/6), swelling (74/83), ulcer (20/11), headache (17/22) and nasopharyngitis (20/5)]. These events were mostly mild and well tolerated. Overall, a polyantigenic response was observed, which differed by HIV- status. The best polyantigenic response was obtained when administrating 25 µg RUTI, especially in HIV-positive subjects which was not increased after the second inoculation.ConclusionThis Phase II clinical trial demonstrates reasonable tolerability of RUTI. The immunogenicity profile of RUTI vaccine in LTBI subjects, even being variable among groups, allows us considering one single injection of one of the highest doses in future trials, preceded by an extended safety clinical phase.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01136161.

Dataset Information

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Novel Intranasal Influenza Vaccine (NasoVAX): A Phase 2 Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets