Dataset Information

A Phase 4, multicentre, randomized, single-blind clinical trial to evaluate the immunogenicity of the live, attenuated, oral rotavirus vaccine (116E), ROTAVAC®, administered simultaneously with or without the buffering agent in healthy infants in India.

ABSTRACT: The World Health Organization recommends that rotavirus vaccines should be included in all national immunization programs. Some currently licensed oral rotavirus vaccines contain a buffering agent (either as part of a ready-to-use liquid formulation or added during reconstitution) to reduce possible degradation of the vaccine virus in the infant gut, which poses several programmatic challenges (the large dose volume or the reconstitution requirement) during vaccine administration. Because ROTAVAC®, a WHO prequalified vaccine, was derived from the 116E neonatal strain, we evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of ROTAVAC® without buffer and ROTAVAC® with buffer in a phase 4, multicentre, single-blind, randomized clinical trial in healthy infants in India.900 infants, approximately 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age, were assigned to 3 groups to receive ROTAVAC® (0.5 mL dose) orally: (i) 2.5 mL of citrate-bicarbonate buffer 5 minutes prior to administration of ROTAVAC® (Group I), (ii) ROTAVAC®, alone, without any buffer (Group II), or (iii) ROTAVAC®, mixed with buffer immediately before administration (Group III). Non-inferiority was compared among the groups for differences in serological responses (detected by serum anti-rotavirus IgA) and safety.Geometric mean titers post vaccination at day 84 (28 days after dose 3) were 19.6 (95%CI: 17.0, 22.7), 20.7 (95%CI: 17.9, 24) and 19.2 (95%CI: 16.8, 22.1) for groups I, II and III respectively. Further, seroconversion rates and distribution of adverse events were similar among groups.Administration of ROTAVAC® at a 0.5 mL dose volume without buffering agent was shown to be well tolerated and immunogenic. Given the homologous nature of the strain, it is plausible that ROTAVAC® replicates well and confers immunity even without buffer administration.

SUBMITTER: Ella R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6067888 | biostudies-other | 2018 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A Phase 4, multicentre, randomized, single-blind clinical trial to evaluate the immunogenicity of the live, attenuated, oral rotavirus vaccine (116E), ROTAVAC®, administered simultaneously with or without the buffering agent in healthy infants in India.

Ella Raches R Bobba Radhika R Muralidhar Sanjay S Babji Sudhir S Vadrevu Krishna Mohan KM Bhan Maharaj Kishan MK

Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics 20180412 7

<h4>Background</h4>The World Health Organization recommends that rotavirus vaccines should be included in all national immunization programs. Some currently licensed oral rotavirus vaccines contain a buffering agent (either as part of a ready-to-use liquid formulation or added during reconstitution) to reduce possible degradation of the vaccine virus in the infant gut, which poses several programmatic challenges (the large dose volume or the reconstitution requirement) during vaccine administrat ...[more]

PMID: 29543547

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and aimsROTAVAC® (frozen formulation stored at -20 °C) and ROTAVAC 5D® (liquid formulation stable at 2-8 °C) are rotavirus vaccines derived from the 116E human neonatal rotavirus strain, developed and licensed in India. This study evaluated and compared the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines in an infant population in Zambia.MethodsWe conducted a phase 2b, open-label, randomized, controlled trial wherein 450 infants 6 to 8 weeks of age were randomized equally to receive three doses of ROTAVAC or ROTAVAC 5D, or two doses of ROTARIX®. Study vaccines were administered concomitantly with routine immunizations. Blood samples were collected pre-vaccination and 28 days after the last dose. Serum anti-rotavirus IgA antibodies were measured by ELISA, with WC3 and 89-12 rotavirus strains as viral lysates in the assays. The primary analysis was to assess non-inferiority of ROTAVAC 5D to ROTAVAC in terms of the geometric mean concentration (GMC) of serum IgA (WC3) antibodies. Seroresponse and seropositivity were also determined. Safety was evaluated as occurrence of immediate, solicited, unsolicited, and serious adverse events after each dose.ResultsThe study evaluated 388 infants in the per-protocol population. All three vaccines were well tolerated and immunogenic. The post-vaccination GMCs were 14.0 U/mL (95% CI: 10.4, 18.8) and 18.1 U/mL (95% CI: 13.7, 24.0) for the ROTAVAC and ROTAVAC 5D groups, respectively, yielding a ratio of 1.3 (95% CI: 0.9, 1.9), thus meeting the pre-set non-inferiority criteria. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events were similar across all study arms. No death or intussusception case was reported during study period.ConclusionsAmong Zambian infants, both ROTAVAC and ROTAVAC 5D were well tolerated and the immunogenicity of ROTAVAC 5D was non-inferior to that of ROTAVAC. These results are consistent with those observed in licensure trials in India and support use of these vaccines across wider geographical areas.

Project description:BackgroundVLA1553 is a live-attenuated vaccine candidate for active immunisation and prevention of disease caused by chikungunya virus. We report safety and immunogenicity data up to day 180 after vaccination with VLA1553.MethodsThis double-blind, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial was done in 43 professional vaccine trial sites in the USA. Eligible participants were healthy volunteers aged 18 years and older. Patients were excluded if they had history of chikungunya virus infection or immune-mediated or chronic arthritis or arthralgia, known or suspected defect of the immune system, any inactivated vaccine received within 2 weeks before vaccination with VLA1553, or any live vaccine received within 4 weeks before vaccination with VLA1553. Participants were randomised (3:1) to receive VLA1553 or placebo. The primary endpoint was the proportion of baseline negative participants with a seroprotective chikungunya virus antibody level defined as 50% plaque reduction in a micro plaque reduction neutralisation test (μPRNT) with a μPRNT50 titre of at least 150, 28 days after vaccination. The safety analysis included all individuals who received vaccination. Immunogenicity analyses were done in a subset of participants at 12 pre-selected study sites. These participants were required to have no major protocol deviations to be included in the per-protocol population for immunogenicity analyses. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04546724.FindingsBetween Sept 17, 2020 and April 10, 2021, 6100 people were screened for eligibility. 1972 people were excluded and 4128 participants were enrolled and randomised (3093 to VLA1553 and 1035 to placebo). 358 participants in the VLA1553 group and 133 participants in the placebo group discontinued before trial end. The per-protocol population for immunogenicity analysis comprised 362 participants (266 in the VLA1553 group and 96 in the placebo group). After a single vaccination, VLA1553 induced seroprotective chikungunya virus neutralising antibody levels in 263 (98·9%) of 266 participants in the VLA1553 group (95% CI 96·7-99·8; p<0·0001) 28 days post-vaccination, independent of age. VLA1553 was generally safe with an adverse event profile similar to other licensed vaccines and equally well tolerated in younger and older adults. Serious adverse events were reported in 46 (1·5%) of 3082 participants exposed to VLA1553 and eight (0·8%) of 1033 participants in the placebo arm. Only two serious adverse events were considered related to VLA1553 treatment (one mild myalgia and one syndrome of inappropriate antidiuretic hormone secretion). Both participants recovered fully.InterpretationThe strong immune response and the generation of seroprotective titres in almost all vaccinated participants suggests that VLA1553 is an excellent candidate for the prevention of disease caused by chikungunya virus.FundingValneva, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation, and EU Horizon 2020.

Project description:BackgroundNutritional status may play a role in infant immune development. To identify potential boosters of immunogenicity in low-income countries where oral vaccine efficacy is low, we tested the effect of prenatal nutritional supplementation on immune response to 3 doses of a live oral rotavirus vaccine.Methods and findingsWe nested a cluster randomized trial within a double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized efficacy trial to assess the effect of 3 prenatal nutritional supplements (lipid-based nutrient supplement [LNS], multiple micronutrient supplement [MMS], or iron-folic acid [IFA]) on infant immune response (n = 53 villages and 1,525 infants with valid serology results: 794 in the vaccine group and 731 in the placebo group). From September 2015 to February 2017, participating women received prenatal nutrient supplement during pregnancy. Eligible infants were then randomized to receive 3 doses of an oral rotavirus vaccine or placebo at 6-8 weeks of age (mean age: 6.3 weeks, 50% female). Infant sera (pre-Dose 1 and 28 days post-Dose 3) were analyzed for anti-rotavirus immunoglobulin A (IgA) using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The primary immunogenicity end point, seroconversion defined as ≥3-fold increase in IgA, was compared in vaccinated infants among the 3 supplement groups and between vaccine/placebo groups using mixed model analysis of variance procedures. Seroconversion did not differ by supplementation group (41.1% (94/229) with LNS vs. 39.1% (102/261) with multiple micronutrients (MMN) vs. 38.8% (118/304) with IFA, p = 0.91). Overall, 39.6% (n = 314/794) of infants who received vaccine seroconverted, compared to 29.0% (n = 212/731) of infants who received placebo (relative risk [RR]: 1.36; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.18, 1.57, p < 0.001). This study was conducted in a high rotavirus transmission setting. Study limitations include the absence of an immune correlate of protection for rotavirus vaccines, with the implications of using serum anti-rotavirus IgA for the assessment of immunogenicity and efficacy in low-income countries unclear.ConclusionsThis study showed no effect of the type of prenatal nutrient supplementation on immune response in this setting. Immune response varied depending on previous exposure to rotavirus, suggesting that alternative delivery modalities and schedules may be considered to improve vaccine performance in high transmission settings.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02145000.

Project description:BACKGROUND:A newly developed bovine-human reassortant pentavalent vaccine (BRV-PV, ROTASIIL®) was tested for its potential effect on the immunogenicity of concomitantly administered EPI vaccines in infants in a randomized controlled study in India. METHODS:In this Phase III, multicenter, open label, randomized, controlled study, three doses of BRV-PV or two doses of Rotarix® and one dose of placebo were given to healthy infants at 6, 10, and 14?weeks of age. Subjects also received three doses of DTwP-HepB-Hib (diphtheria, tetanus, whole-cell pertussis, hepatitis B, and haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate - pentavalent vaccine) and oral polio vaccine concomitantly at 6, 10, and 14?weeks of age and a single dose of inactivated polio vaccine at 14?weeks of age. Blood samples were collected four weeks after the final vaccination to assess immune responses to all the vaccines administered. For diphtheria, tetanus, hepatitis B, Hib, polio type 1, and polio type 3 antibodies, non-interference was to be supported if the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) for the seroprotection rate difference for the BRV-PV group minus the Rotarix® group was >10.0%. For pertussis antibodies, non-interference was to be supported if the lower limit of the two-sided 90% CI for the ratio of geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) was >0.5. RESULTS:A total of 1500 infants were randomized to either BRV-PV (1125 infants) or Rotarix® (375 infants), of which 1341 completed the study as per the protocol. More than 97% of subjects achieved seroprotective antibody titres against diphtheria, tetanus, hepatitis B, Hib, polio type 1, and polio type 3 in both groups. The difference in seroprotection rates between the BRV-PV group and the Rotarix® group for all these antibodies was less than 1%. The ratio of GMCs of anti-pertussis IgG concentrations for the BRV-PV group versus Rotarix® was 1.04 [90% CI: 0.90; 1.19]. CONCLUSION:BRV-PV does not interfere with the immunogenicity of concomitantly administered routine infants vaccines.

Project description:BackgroundRotavirus is the leading cause of severe dehydrating gastroenteritis among children younger than 5 years in low-income and middle-income countries. Two vaccines-Rotavac and Rotasiil-are used in routine immunisation in India. The safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines administered in a mixed regimen is not documented. We therefore aimed to compare the safety and seroresponse of recipients of a mixed regimen versus a single regimen.MethodsWe did a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 4, non-inferiority trial at two sites in India. We recruited healthy infants aged 6-8 weeks. Infants with systemic disorders, weight-for-height Z scores of less than minus three SDs, or a history of persistent diarrhoea were excluded. Eligible infants were randomly allocated to six groups in equal numbers to receive either the single vaccine regimen (ie, Rotavac-Rotavac-Rotavac [group 1] or Rotasiil-Rotasiil-Rotasiil [group 2]) or the mixed vaccine regimen (ie, Rotavac-Rotasiil-Rotavac [group 3], Rotasiil-Rotavac-Rotasiil [group 4], Rotavac-Rotasiil-Rotasiil [group 5], or Rotasiil-Rotavac-Rotavac [group 6]). Randomisation was done using an online software by site in blocks of at least 12. The primary outcome was seroresponse to rotavirus vaccine, measured using rotavirus-specific serum IgA antibodies 4 weeks after the third dose. The seroresponse rates were compared between recipients of the four mixed vaccine regimens (consisting of various combinations of Rotavac and Rotasiil) with recipients of the single vaccine regimens (consisting of Rotavac or Rotasiil only for all three doses). The non-inferiority margin was set at 10%. Safety follow-ups were done for the duration of study participation. This trial was registered with the Clinical Trials Registry India, number CTRI/2018/08/015317.FindingsBetween March 25, 2019, and Jan 15, 2020, a total of 1979 eligible infants were randomly assigned to receive a single vaccine regimen (n=659; 329 in group 1 and 330 in group 2) or a mixed vaccine regimen (n=1320; 329 each in groups 3 and 4, and 331 each in groups 5 and 6). All eligible participants received the first dose, 1925 (97·3%) of 1979 received the second dose, and 1894 (95·7%) received all three doses of vaccine. 1852 (93·6%) of 1979 participants completed the follow-up. The immunogenicity analysis consisted of 1839 infants (1238 [67·3%] in the mixed vaccine regimen and 601 [32·7%] in the single vaccine regimen; 13 samples were insufficient in quantity) who completed vaccination and provided post-vaccination sera. The seroresponse rate in the mixed vaccine regimen group (33·5% [95% CI 30·9-36·2]) was non-inferior compared with the single vaccine regimen group (29·6% [26·1-33·4]); the seroresponse rate difference was 3·9% (95% CI -0·7 to 8·3). The proportion of participants with any type of solicited adverse events was 90·9% (95% CI 88·4-93·0) in the single vaccine regimen group and 91·1% (89·5-92·6) in the mixed vaccine regimen group. No vaccine-related serious adverse events or intussusception were reported during the study.InterpretationRotavac and Rotasiil can be safely used in an interchangeable manner for routine immunisation since the seroresponse was non-inferior in the mixed vaccine regimen compared with the single vaccine regimen. These results allow for flexibility in administering the vaccines, helping to overcome vaccine shortages and supply chain issues, and targeting migrant populations easily.FundingMinistry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India.TranslationFor the Hindi translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Dataset Information

A Phase 4, multicentre, randomized, single-blind clinical trial to evaluate the immunogenicity of the live, attenuated, oral rotavirus vaccine (116E), ROTAVAC®, administered simultaneously with or without the buffering agent in healthy infants in India.

Publications

A Phase 4, multicentre, randomized, single-blind clinical trial to evaluate the immunogenicity of the live, attenuated, oral rotavirus vaccine (116E), ROTAVAC®, administered simultaneously with or without the buffering agent in healthy infants in India.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets