Bivalent Prefusion F Vaccine in Pregnancy to Prevent RSV Illness in Infants.

BACKGROUND: Whether vaccination during pregnancy could reduce the burden of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV)-associated lower respiratory tract illness in newborns and infants is uncertain. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind trial conducted in 18 countries, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, pregnant women at 24 through 36 weeks' gestation to receive a single intramuscular injection of 120 µg of a bivalent RSV prefusion F protein-based (RSVpreF) vaccine or placebo. The two primary efficacy end points were medically attended severe RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness and medically attended RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness in infants within 90, 120, 150, and 180 days after birth. A lower boundary of the confidence interval for vaccine efficacy (99.5% confidence interval [CI] at 90 days; 97.58% CI at later intervals) greater than 20% was considered to meet the success criterion for vaccine efficacy with respect to the primary end points. RESULTS: At this prespecified interim analysis, the success criterion for vaccine efficacy was met with respect to one primary end point. Overall, 3682 maternal participants received vaccine and 3676 received placebo; 3570 and 3558 infants, respectively, were evaluated. Medically attended severe lower respiratory tract illness occurred within 90 days after birth in 6 infants of women in the vaccine group and 33 infants of women in the placebo group (vaccine efficacy, 81.8%; 99.5% CI, 40.6 to 96.3); 19 cases and 62 cases, respectively, occurred within 180 days after birth (vaccine efficacy, 69.4%; 97.58% CI, 44.3 to 84.1). Medically attended RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness occurred within 90 days after birth in 24 infants of women in the vaccine group and 56 infants of women in the placebo group (vaccine efficacy, 57.1%; 99.5% CI, 14.7 to 79.8); these results did not meet the statistical success criterion. No safety signals were detected in maternal participants or in infants and toddlers up to 24 months of age. The incidences of adverse events reported within 1 month after injection or within 1 month after birth were similar in the vaccine group (13.8% of women and 37.1% of infants) and the placebo group (13.1% and 34.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: RSVpreF vaccine administered during pregnancy was effective against medically attended severe RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness in infants, and no safety concerns were identified. (Funded by Pfizer; MATISSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04424316.).

Efficacy and Safety of a Bivalent RSV Prefusion F Vaccine in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection causes considerable illness in older adults. The efficacy and safety of an investigational bivalent RSV prefusion F protein-based (RSVpreF) vaccine in this population are unknown. METHODS: In this ongoing, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adults (≥60 years of age) to receive a single intramuscular injection of RSVpreF vaccine at a dose of 120 µg (RSV subgroups A and B, 60 µg each) or placebo. The two primary end points were vaccine efficacy against seasonal RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness with at least two or at least three signs or symptoms. The secondary end point was vaccine efficacy against RSV-associated acute respiratory illness. RESULTS: At the interim analysis (data-cutoff date, July 14, 2022), 34,284 participants had received RSVpreF vaccine (17,215 participants) or placebo (17,069 participants). RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness with at least two signs or symptoms occurred in 11 participants in the vaccine group (1.19 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) and 33 participants in the placebo group (3.58 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) (vaccine efficacy, 66.7%; 96.66% confidence interval [CI], 28.8 to 85.8); 2 cases (0.22 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) and 14 cases (1.52 cases per 1000 person-years of observation), respectively, occurred with at least three signs or symptoms (vaccine efficacy, 85.7%; 96.66% CI, 32.0 to 98.7). RSV-associated acute respiratory illness occurred in 22 participants in the vaccine group (2.38 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) and 58 participants in the placebo group (6.30 cases per 1000 person-years of observation) (vaccine efficacy, 62.1%; 95% CI, 37.1 to 77.9). The incidence of local reactions was higher with vaccine (12%) than with placebo (7%); the incidences of systemic events were similar (27% and 26%, respectively). Similar rates of adverse events through 1 month after injection were reported (vaccine, 9.0%; placebo, 8.5%), with 1.4% and 1.0%, respectively, considered by the investigators to be injection-related. Severe or life-threatening adverse events were reported in 0.5% of vaccine recipients and 0.4% of placebo recipients. Serious adverse events were reported in 2.3% of participants in each group through the data-cutoff date. CONCLUSIONS: RSVpreF vaccine prevented RSV-associated lower respiratory tract illness and RSV-associated acute respiratory illness in adults (≥60 years of age), without evident safety concerns. (Funded by Pfizer; RENOIR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05035212; EudraCT number, 2021-003693-31.).

Respiratory Syncytial Virus Prefusion F Protein Vaccine in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is an important cause of acute respiratory infection, lower respiratory tract disease, clinical complications, and death in older adults. There is currently no licensed vaccine against RSV infection. METHODS: In an ongoing, international, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adults 60 years of age or older to receive a single dose of an AS01E-adjuvanted RSV prefusion F protein-based candidate vaccine (RSVPreF3 OA) or placebo before the RSV season. The primary objective was to show vaccine efficacy of one dose of the RSVPreF3 OA vaccine against RSV-related lower respiratory tract disease, confirmed by reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR), during one RSV season. The criterion for meeting the primary objective was a lower limit of the confidence interval around the efficacy estimate of more than 20%. Efficacy against severe RSV-related lower respiratory tract disease and RSV-related acute respiratory infection was assessed, and analyses according to RSV subtype (A and B) were performed. Safety was evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 24,966 participants received one dose of the RSVPreF3 OA vaccine (12,467 participants) or placebo (12,499). Over a median follow-up of 6.7 months, vaccine efficacy against RT-PCR-confirmed RSV-related lower respiratory tract disease was 82.6% (96.95% confidence interval [CI], 57.9 to 94.1), with 7 cases (1.0 per 1000 participant-years) in the vaccine group and 40 cases (5.8 per 1000 participant-years) in the placebo group. Vaccine efficacy was 94.1% (95% CI, 62.4 to 99.9) against severe RSV-related lower respiratory tract disease (assessed on the basis of clinical signs or by the investigator) and 71.7% (95% CI, 56.2 to 82.3) against RSV-related acute respiratory infection. Vaccine efficacy was similar against the RSV A and B subtypes (for RSV-related lower respiratory tract disease: 84.6% and 80.9%, respectively; for RSV-related acute respiratory infection: 71.9% and 70.6%, respectively). High vaccine efficacy was observed in various age groups and in participants with coexisting conditions. The RSVPreF3 OA vaccine was more reactogenic than placebo, but most adverse events for which reports were solicited were transient, with mild-to-moderate severity. The incidences of serious adverse events and potential immune-mediated diseases were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: A single dose of the RSVPreF3 OA vaccine had an acceptable safety profile and prevented RSV-related acute respiratory infection and lower respiratory tract disease and severe RSV-related lower respiratory tract disease in adults 60 years of age or older, regardless of RSV subtype and the presence of underlying coexisting conditions. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals; AReSVi-006 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04886596.).

Combinatorial F-G Immunogens as Nipah and Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccine Candidates.

Nipah virus (NiV) and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) possess two surface glycoproteins involved in cellular attachment and membrane fusion, both of which are potential targets for vaccines. The majority of vaccine development is focused on the attachment (G) protein of NiV, which is the immunodominant target. In contrast, the fusion (F) protein of RSV is the main target in vaccine development. Despite this, neutralising epitopes have been described in NiV F and RSV G, making them alternate targets for vaccine design. Through rational design, we have developed a vaccine strategy applicable to phylogenetically divergent NiV and RSV that comprises both the F and G proteins (FxG). In a mouse immunization model, we found that NiV FxG elicited an improved immune response capable of neutralising pseudotyped NiV and a NiV mutant that is able to escape neutralisation by two known F-specific antibodies. RSV FxG elicited an immune response against both F and G and was able to neutralise RSV; however, this was inferior to the immune response of F alone. Despite this, RSV FxG elicited a response against a known protective epitope within G that is conserved across RSV A and B subgroups, which may provide additional protection in vivo. We conclude that inclusion of F and G antigens within a single design provides a streamlined subunit vaccine strategy against both emerging and established pathogens, with the potential for broader protection against NiV.

Comparison of the immune response following subcutaneous versus intranasal modified-live virus booster vaccination against bovine respiratory disease in pre-weaning beef calves that had received primary vaccination by the intranasal route.

This study was performed to elucidate whether the route of booster vaccination affects the immune response against respiratory vaccine viruses in pre-weaning beef calves that receive primary intranasal (IN) vaccination during the first month of life. The objective was to compare the serum neutralizing antibody (SNA) titers to BHV1, BRSV, and BPI3V, cytokine mRNA expression and mucosal BHV1- and BRSV-specific IgA in nasal secretions following administration of IN or subcutaneous (SC) modified-live virus (MLV) booster vaccines 60 days after primary IN vaccination in young beef calves. Twenty-one beef calves were administered 2 mL of an IN MLV vaccine containing BHV1, BRSV, and BPI3V (Inforce3®) between one and five weeks of age. Sixty days after primary vaccination, calves were randomly assigned to one of two groups: IN-MLV (n = 11): Calves received 2 mL of the same IN MLV vaccine used for primary vaccination and 2 mL of a SC MLV vaccine containing BVDV1 & 2 (Bovi- Shield GOLD® BVD). SC-MLV (n = 10): Calves were administered 2 mL of a MLV vaccine containing, BHV1, BRSV, BPI3V, and BVDV1 & 2 (Bovi-Shield GOLD® 5). Blood and nasal secretion samples were collected on days -61 (primary vaccination), -28, -14, 0 (booster vaccination), 14, 21, 28, 42 and 60 for determination of SNA titers, cytokine gene expression analysis and nasal virus-specific IgA concentrations. Statistical analysis was performed using a repeated measures analysis through PROC GLIMMIX of SAS®. Booster vaccination by neither IN nor SC routes induced a significant increase in SNA titers against BHV1, BRSV, and BPI3V. Subcutaneous booster vaccination induced significantly greater BRSV-specific SNA titers (on day 42) and IgA concentration in nasal secretions (on days 21 and 42) compared to calves receiving IN booster vaccination. Both IN and SC booster vaccination were able to stimulate the production of BHV1-specific IgA in nasal secretions. In summary, booster vaccination of young beef calves using either SC or IN route two months after IN MLV primary vaccination resulted in comparable SNA titers, cytokine gene expression profile and virus-specific IgA concentration in nasal secretions. Only a few differences in the systemic and mucosal immune response against BHV1 and BRSV were observed. Subcutaneous booster vaccination induced significantly greater BRSV-specific SNA and secretory IgA titers compared to IN booster vaccination.