Immunogenicity and safety of an 18-month booster dose of the VLA15 Lyme borreliosis vaccine candidate after primary immunisation in healthy adults in the USA: results of the booster phase of a randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Incidence rates of Lyme borreliosis, a tickborne disease attributed to infection by Borrelia species, are increasing, and limitations to existing treatments potentiate the possibility of severe outcomes. Nevertheless, there are no licensed vaccines for Lyme borreliosis prevention in humans. This study investigated the immunogenicity and safety of a booster dose of VLA15, an investigational outer surface protein A (OspA)-based Lyme borreliosis vaccine that has previously shown safety and immunogenicity when administered as a primary vaccination series, following a primary VLA15 vaccination series. METHODS: We report the results of the booster phase of a randomised, observer-blinded, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 2 study that enrolled healthy adults aged 18-65 years from five US clinical study centres to receive 135 µg or 180 µg VLA15 or placebo at months 0, 2, and 6 in the main study phase. Participants who received 180 µg VLA15 in the main study phase and did not have relevant protocol deviations were eligible for the booster phase (months 18-30). Participants were randomly reassigned (2:1) to receive an intramuscular injection of a VLA15 booster or placebo 1 year after the completion of primary vaccination (month 18) via a randomisation list generated by an unmasked statistician with a block size of six. Individuals involved in data safety monitoring, rerandomisation, vaccine handling, and vaccine accountability were unmasked; the study sponsor and statisticians were only unmasked after analysis of data up to 1 month after booster administration. All other individuals remained masked throughout the booster phase. The outcomes for the booster phase were the immunogenicity (evaluated in the booster per-protocol population) and safety (evaluated for all participants who received the booster) of the booster dose up to month 30. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03970733) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Feb 4 and March 23, 2021, 58 participants (28 men and 30 women) were screened, randomly assigned, and received VLA15 (n=39) or placebo (n=19). One participant in the placebo group was lost to follow-up. The IgG geometric mean titres for each OspA serotype (serotypes 1-6) in the VLA15 group peaked at 1 month after the booster dose (1277·0 U/mL [95% CI 861·8-1892·3] to 2194·5 U/mL [1566·8-3073·7] vs 23·6 U/mL [18·1-30·8] to 36·8 U/mL [26·4-51·3] in the placebo group [p<0·0001 for all serotypes]), remained elevated at month 24 (137·4 U/mL [95·8-196·9] to 265·8 U/mL [202·9-348·2] vs 22·3 U/mL [17·7-28·0] to 29·1 U/mL [20·8-40·6] in the placebo group; p<0·0001 for all serotypes), and declined by month 30 (54·1 U/mL [38·6-75·7] to 101·6 U/mL [77·6-133·1] vs 21·9 U/mL [18·0-26·6] to 24·9 U/mL [19·0-32·6] in the placebo group; p<0·0001 for all serotypes except serotype 1 [p=0·0006]). Solicited local adverse events were reported more frequently in the VLA15 group (35 [92%, 95% CI 79-97] of 38 participants) than the placebo group (six [32%, 15-54] of 19 participants; p<0·0001) after booster vaccination. There was no significant difference in the frequency of solicited systemic adverse events between groups (20 [59%, 42-74] of 34 participants in the VLA15 group vs six [38%, 18-61] of 16 participants in the placebo group). Related unsolicited adverse events (none severe) were reported by two (5%, 1-17) of 39 participants in the VLA15 group and none (0%, 0-17) of 19 participants in the placebo group. There were no severe solicited local or systemic adverse events or deaths during the study. INTERPRETATION: A booster dose of VLA15 is safe and induces substantial anamnestic immune responses against all six OspA serotypes. As with previously investigated OspA-based Lyme borreliosis vaccines, waning immune responses were observed with VLA15, and annual boosters might therefore be required. FUNDING: Valneva.

Optimisation of dose level and vaccination schedule for the VLA15 Lyme borreliosis vaccine candidate among healthy adults: two randomised, observer-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 2 studies.

BACKGROUND: Rising Lyme borreliosis incidence rates, potential for severe outcomes, and limitations in accurate and timely diagnosis for treatment initiation suggest the need for a preventive vaccine; however, no vaccine is currently available for human use. We performed two studies in adults to optimise the dose level and vaccination schedule for VLA15, an investigational Lyme borreliosis vaccine targeting outer surface protein A (OspA) serotypes 1-6, which are associated with the most common pathogenic Borrelia species in Europe and North America. METHODS: Both randomised, observer-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 2 studies included participants aged 18-65 years without recent history of Lyme borreliosis or tick bites. Study one was conducted at nine clinical research and study centre sites in the USA (n=6), Germany (n=2), and Belgium (n=1); study two was conducted at five of the study one US sites. Based on a randomisation list created by an unmasked statistician for each study, participants were randomly assigned via an electronic case report form randomisation module to receive 90 µg (study one only), 135 µg, or 180 µg VLA15 or placebo by intramuscular injection at months 0, 1, and 2 (study one) or 0, 2, and 6 (study two). Study one began with a run-in phase to confirm safety, after which the Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended the removal of the 90 µg group and continuation of the study. In the study one run-in phase, randomisation was stratified by study site, whereas in the study one main phase and in study two, randomisation was stratified by study site, age group, and baseline B burgdorferi (sensu lato) serostatus. All individuals were masked, other than staff involved in randomisation, vaccine preparation or administration, or safety data monitoring. The primary endpoint for both studies was OspA-specific IgG geometric mean titres (GMTs) at 1 month after the third vaccination and was evaluated in the per-protocol population. Safety endpoints were evaluated in the safety population: all participants who received at least one vaccination. Both studies are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (study one NCT03769194 and study two NCT03970733) and are completed. FINDINGS: For study one, 573 participants were screened and randomly assigned to treatment groups between Dec 21, 2018, and Sept, 26, 2019. For study two, 248 participants were screened and randomly assigned between June 26 and Sept 3, 2019. In study one, 29 participants were assigned to receive 90 µg VLA15, 215 to 135 µg, 205 to 180 µg, and 124 to placebo. In study two, 97 participants were assigned to receive 135 µg VLA15, 100 to 180 µg, and 51 to placebo. At 1 month after the third vaccination (ie, month 3), OspA-specific IgG GMTs in study one ranged from 74·3 (serotype 1; 95% CI 46·4-119·0) to 267·4 units per mL (serotype 3; 194·8-367·1) for 90 µg VLA15, 101·9 (serotype 1; 87·1-119·4) to 283·2 units per mL (serotype 3; 248·2-323·1) for 135 µg, and 115·8 (serotype 1; 98·8-135·7) to 308·6 units per mL (serotype 3; 266·8-356·8) for 180 µg. In study two, ranges at 1 month after the third vaccination (ie, month 7) were 278·5 (serotype 1; 214·9-361·0) to 545·2 units per mL (serotype 2; 431·8-688·4) for 135 µg VLA15 and 274·7 (serotype 1; 209·4-360·4) to 596·8 units per mL (serotype 3; 471·9-754·8) for 180 µg. Relative to placebo, the VLA15 groups had more frequent reports of solicited local adverse events (study one: 94%, 95% CI 91-96 vs 26%, 19-34; study two: 96%, 93-98 vs 35%, 24-49 after any vaccination) and solicited systemic adverse events (study one: 69%, 65-73 vs 43%, 34-52; study two: 74%, 67-80 vs 51%, 38-64); most were mild or moderate. In study one, unsolicited adverse events were reported by 52% (48-57) of participants in the VLA15 groups and 52% (43-60) of those in the placebo groups; for study two these were 65% (58-71) and 69% (55-80), respectively. Percentages of participants reporting serious unsolicited adverse events (study one: 2%, 1-4; study two: 4%, 2-7) and adverse events of special interest (study one: 1%, 0-2; study two: 1%, 0-3) were low across all groups. A single severe, possibly related unsolicited adverse event was reported (worsening of pre-existing ventricular extrasystoles, which resolved after change of relevant concomitant medication); no related serious adverse events or deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: VLA15 was safe, well tolerated, and elicited robust antibody responses to all six OspA serotypes. These findings support further clinical development of VLA15 using the 180 µg dose and 0-2-6-month schedule, which was associated with the greatest immune responses. FUNDING: Valneva.

Safety and immunogenicity of a novel multivalent OspA-based vaccine candidate against Lyme borreliosis: a randomised, phase 1 study in healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Lyme borreliosis, potentially associated with serious long-term complications, is caused by the species complex Borrelia burgdorferi sensu lato. We investigated a novel Lyme borreliosis vaccine candidate (VLA15) targeting the six most common outer surface protein A (OspA) serotypes 1-6 to prevent infection with pathogenic Borrelia spp prevalent in Europe and North America. METHODS: This was a partially randomised, observer-masked, phase 1 study in healthy adults older than 18 years to younger than 40 years (n=179) done in trial sites in Belgium and the USA. Following a non-randomised run-in phase, a sealed envelope randomisation method was applied with a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio; three dose concentrations of VLA15 (12 µg, 48 µg, and 90 µg) were administered by intramuscular injection on days 1, 29, and 57. The primary outcome was safety (frequency of adverse events up to day 85) assessed in participants who received at least one vaccination. Immunogenicity was a secondary outcome. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03010228, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Jan 23, 2017 and Jan 16, 2019, of 254 participants screened for eligibility, 179 were randomly assigned into six groups: alum-adjuvanted 12 µg (n=29), 48 µg (n=31), or 90 µg (n=31) and non-adjuvanted 12 µg (n=29 participants), 48 µg (n=29), or 90 µg (n=30). VLA15 was safe and well tolerated and the majority of adverse events were mild or moderate. Overall, adverse events were more frequent in the 48 µg and 90 µg groups (range 28-30 participants [94-97%]) when compared with the 12 µg group (25 [86%] participants, 95% CI 69·4-94·5) for adjuvanted and non-adjuvanted groups. Common local reactions were tenderness (151 [84%] participants; 356 events, 95% CI 78·3-89·4) and injection site pain (120 [67%]; 224 events, 59·9-73·5); most frequent systemic reactions were headache (80 [45%]; 112 events, 37·6-52·0), excessive fatigue (45 [25%]; 56 events, 19·4-32·0), and myalgia (45 [25%]; 57 events, 19·4-32·0). A similar safety and tolerability profile was observed between adjuvanted and non-adjuvanted formulations. The majority of solicited adverse events were mild or moderate. VLA15 was immunogenic for all OspA serotypes with higher immune responses induced in the adjuvanted higher dose groups (geometric mean titre range 90 µg with alum 61·3 U/mL-321·7 U/mL vs 23·8 U/mL-111·5 U/mL at 90 µg without alum). INTERPRETATION: This novel multivalent vaccine candidate against Lyme borreliosis was safe and immunogenic and paves the way to further clinical development. FUNDING: Valneva Austria.

Single-shot live-attenuated chikungunya vaccine in healthy adults: a phase 1, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Chikungunya disease, which results in incapacitating arthralgia, has been reported worldwide. We developed a live-attenuated chikungunya virus (CHIKV) vaccine candidate designed for active immunisation of the general population living in endemic regions, as well as serving as a prophylactic measure for travellers to endemic areas. METHODS: This single-blind, randomised, dose-escalation, phase 1 study investigated as primary outcome safety of a live-attenuated CHIKV vaccine candidate. At two professional clinical trial centres in Illinois and Alabama, USA, healthy volunteers aged 18-45 years were randomly assigned (1:1:2) to one of three escalating dose groups (low dose 3·2 × 103 per 0·1 mL; medium dose 3·2 × 104 per 1 mL; or high dose 3·2 × 105 50% tissue culture infection dose per 1 mL) and received a single-shot immunisation on day 0. Individuals in all groups were revaccinated with the highest dose on either month 6 or 12, and followed up for 28 days after revaccination. The safety analysis included all individuals who received the single vaccination; the immunogenicity analysis, which was a secondary outcome, included all individuals who completed the study without major protocol deviations (per-protocol population). The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03382964, and is complete. FINDINGS: The study was done between March 5, 2018, and Jul 23, 2019, with 120 adults recruited and enrolled between March 5 and June 21, 2018, and assigned to receive a low (n=31), medium (n=30), or high (n=59) dose of the vaccine. The vaccine was safe in the high-dose group and well tolerated in the low-dose and medium-dose groups. Four (7%) of 59 vaccinees in the high-dose group reported any local reaction, and 11 (36%), 12 (40%), and 40 (68%) volunteers in the low-dose, medium-dose, and high-dose groups, respectively, reported any solicited systemic reaction. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. Data up to month 12 after a single immunisation of the 120 healthy volunteers showed a good immunogenicity profile with 100% seroconversion rates achieved at day 14 (103 [100%] of 103) and sustained for 1 year across all dose groups. Mean peak antibody titres at day 28 ranged from 592·6 to 686·9 geometric mean titres from the low-dose to high-dose groups, respectively. A single vaccination was sufficient to induce sustaining high-titre neutralising antibodies, as shown by the absence of an anamnestic response after any revaccination ranging from 94% to 100% of participants. Following revaccination, vaccinees were protected from vaccine-induced viraemia. INTERPRETATION: A novel live-attenuated CHIKV vaccine was well tolerated and highly immunogenic in an adult population and could be an effective intervention for prophylaxis of chikungunya disease worldwide. FUNDING: Valneva, Vienna, Austria; Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovation and EU Horizon 2020.

Rabies pre-exposure vaccination of children with purified chick embryo cell vaccine (PCECV).

Human rabies, mainly transmitted by dog bites, remains a major public health problem in developing countries. In Asian countries, such as India or the Philippines, where large free-ranging dog populations exist, the human death toll stays high. Children under the age of 15 y are at particular risk, representing up to half of the dog bite victims. While pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is commonly used in travelers from developed countries visiting areas of high endemicity, rabies vaccination is rarely used in highly endemic countries in contrast to post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP). Purified Chick Embryo Cell Vaccine (PCECV, Rabipur®/RabAvert®, Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics) is approved for pre- and post-exposure prophylaxis, either by the intramuscular route, or--where registered--by the intradermal route of administration. In more than 25 y of use, PCECV has been widely used for PrEP in children. This review summarizes the pediatric pre-exposure clinical trials using PCECV. In total, PCECV has been administered to more than 1,200 children in clinical trials, from toddlers to those in elementary school, using intramuscular and intradermal schedules, demonstrating safety and immunogenicity. PrEP as part of routine pediatric vaccination programs may have a major role to play in human rabies prevention. Extensive clinical experience with PCECV supports intramuscular and intradermal PrEP in children as one pillar of human rabies prevention in developing countries.

The hierarchy of work pursuits of public health managers.

How public health is managed in various settings is an important but under-examined issue. We examine themes in the management literature, contextualize issues facing public health managers and investigate the relative importance placed on their various work pursuits using a 14-activity management model empirically derived from studies of clinician-managers in hospitals. Ethnographic case studies of 10 managers in nine diverse public health settings were conducted. The case study accounts of managers' activities were content analysed, and substantive words encapsulating their work were categorized using the model. Managerial activities of the nine public health managers were ranked according to the number of words describing each activity. Kendall's coefficient of concordance yielded W = 0.710, P < 0.000, revealing significant similarity between the activity patterns of the public health managers. A rank order correlation between the activity patterns of the average ranks for the public health sample and for the hospital clinician-managers (n = 52) was R = 0.420, P = 0.131, indicating no significant relationship between relative activity priorities of the two groups. Public health managers put less emphasis on pursuits associated with structure, hierarchy and education, and more on external relations and decision-making. The model of hospital clinician-managers' managerial activities is applicable to public health managers while identifying differences in the way the two groups manage. The findings suggest that public health management work is more managerialist than previously thought.

New helicase-primase inhibitors as drug candidates for the treatment of herpes simplex disease.

The vast majority of the world population is infected with at least one member of the human herpesvirus family. Herpes simplex virus (HSV) infections are the cause of cold sores and genital herpes as well as life-threatening or sight-impairing disease mainly in immunocompromized patients, pregnant women and newborns. Since the milestone development in the late 1970s of acyclovir (Zovirax), a nucleosidic inhibitor of the herpes DNA polymerase, no new non-nucleosidic anti-herpes drugs have been introduced. Here we report new inhibitors of the HSV helicase-primase with potent in vitro anti-herpes activity, a novel mechanism of action, a low resistance rate and superior efficacy against HSV in animal models. BAY 57-1293 (N-[5-(aminosulfonyl)-4-methyl-1,3-thiazol-2-yl]-N-methyl-2-[4-(2-pyridinyl)phenyl]acetamide), a well-tolerated member of this class of compounds, significantly reduces time to healing, prevents rebound of disease after cessation of treatment and, most importantly, reduces frequency and severity of recurrent disease. Thus, this class of drugs has significant potential for the treatment of HSV disease in humans, including those resistant to current medications.

Ethics of university research, biotechnology and potential military spin-off.

The paper provides a brief introduction to the biotechnology revolution and its impact upon biological research relevant to military uses. It describes the status of biological weapon today, and current efforts to strengthen the Biological Weapons Convention with a legally binding compliance protocol. Specific modifications of micro-organisms that may be of military use are discussed. There examples of dual-use research activities are then used to highlight issues and dilemmas in ethical decision making.