Immunogenicity and safety of an adjuvanted inactivated polio vaccine, IPV-Al, following vaccination in children at 2, 4, 6 and at 15-18 months.

BACKGROUND: Availability of affordable inactivated polio vaccines (IPV) is of major importance to meet the increasing global supply needs. The results presented here demonstrate non-inferiority of a reduced-dose, aluminium hydroxide-adjuvanted IPV (IPV-Al) to standard IPV. METHODS: A phase 3, observer-blinded, randomised, clinical trial was conducted in Panama in infants who received either IPV-Al (n = 400) or standard IPV (n = 400) at age 2, 4 and 6 months. In the booster trial, subjects received a single dose of IPV-Al at age 15-18 months. The primary endpoint was type-specific seroconversion, defined as an antibody titre ≥4-fold higher than the estimated maternal antibody titre and a titre ≥8, one month after the primary vaccination series. In the booster trial, the primary endpoint was the type-specific booster effects (geometric mean titre (GMT) post-booster (Day 28)/GMT pre-booster (Day 0). RESULTS: Seroconversion rates following primary vaccination with IPV-Al vs IPV were: 96.1% vs 100% (type 1); 100% vs 100% (type 2); and 99.2% vs 100% (type 3) respectively. IPV-Al was non-inferior to IPV, as the lower 95% confidence limits of the treatment differences were above the pre-defined -10%-point limit: 3.94% (-6.51; -2.01) for type 1; 0.0% (-1.30; -1.37) for type 2; -0.85 (-2.46; 0.40) for type 3. The booster effects for the group primed with IPV-Al versus the group primed with IPV were 25.3 vs 9.2 (type 1), 19.1 vs 6.5 (type 2) and 50.4 vs 12.5 (type 3). IPV-Al had a comparable safety profile to that of IPV. CONCLUSIONS: Non-inferiority of IPV-Al to standard IPV with respect to seroconversion after vaccination at 2, 4 and 6 months was confirmed for all three poliovirus serotypes. A robust booster response was demonstrated following vaccination with IPV-Al, regardless of the primary vaccine received. Both vaccines were well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03025750 and NCT03671616. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

Immunogenicity and safety of an adjuvanted inactivated polio vaccine, IPV-Al, compared to standard IPV: A phase 3 observer-blinded, randomised, controlled trial in infants vaccinated at 6, 10, 14 weeks and 9 months of age.

BACKGROUND: A dose-sparing inactivated polio vaccine (IPV-Al), obtained by adsorption of inactivated virus to an aluminium hydroxide adjuvant, can help mitigate global supply and the cost constraints of IPV. The objective of this trial was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of IPV-Al to standard IPV. METHODS: This phase 3, observer-blinded, randomised, controlled trial was conducted at 5 investigational sites in the Philippines. Infants not previously vaccinated with any polio vaccines were randomised to receive three IPV-Al (n = 502) or IPV vaccinations (n = 500) at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age plus a booster vaccination at 9 months. The primary endpoint was type-specific seroconversion, defined as an antibody titre ≥4-fold higher than the estimated maternal antibody titre and a titre ≥8, one month after the primary vaccination series. RESULTS: Seroconversion rates following primary vaccination with IPV-Al (483 infants in the per-protocol analysis set) or IPV (478 infants) were: polio type 1, 97.1% versus 99.0%; type 2, 94.2% versus 99.0%; and type 3, 98.3% versus 99.6%. IPV-Al was non-inferior to IPV, as the lower 95% confidence limits of the treatment differences were above the predefined -10%-point limit: type 1, -1.85% (-3.85; -0.05); type 2, -4.75% (-7.28; -2.52); type 3, -1.24 (-2.84; 0.13). The booster effect (geometric mean titre (GMT) post-booster / GMT pre-booster) was: type 1, 63 versus 43; type 2, 54 versus 47; type 3, 112 versus 80. IPV-Al was well tolerated with a safety profile comparable to that of IPV. Serious adverse events were recorded for 29 infants (5.8%, 37 events) in the IPV-Al group compared to 28 (5.6%, 48 events) in the IPV group. CONCLUSION: Non-inferiority of IPV-Al to IPV with respect to seroconversion was confirmed and a robust booster response was demonstrated. Both vaccines had a similar safety profile. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03032419.

Immunogenicity and safety of three aluminium hydroxide adjuvanted vaccines with reduced doses of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV-Al) compared with standard IPV in young infants in the Dominican Republic: a phase 2, non-inferiority, observer-blinded, randomised, and controlled dose investigation trial.

BACKGROUND: Cost and supply constraints are key challenges in the use of inactivated polio vaccine (IPV). Dose reduction through adsorption to aluminium hydroxide (Al) is a promising option, and establishing its effectiveness in the target population is a crucial milestone in developing IPV-Al. The aim of this clinical trial was to show the non-inferiority of three IPV-Al vaccines to standard IPV. METHODS: In this phase 2, non-inferiority, observer-blinded, randomised, controlled, single-centre trial in the Dominican Republic, healthy infants aged 6 weeks, not previously polio vaccinated, were allocated after computer-generated randomisation by block-size of four, to receive one of four IPV formulations (three-times reduced dose [1/3 IPV-Al], five-times reduced dose [1/5 IPV-Al], ten-times reduced dose [1/10 IPV-Al], or IPV) intramuscularly in the thigh at 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age. The primary outcome was seroconversion for poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 with titres more than or equal to four-fold higher than the estimated maternal antibody titre and more than or equal to 8 after three vaccinations. Non-inferiority was concluded if the lower two-sided 90% CI of the seroconversion rate difference between IPV-Al and IPV was greater than -10%. The safety analyses were based on the safety analysis set (randomly assigned participants who received at least one trial vaccination) and the immunogenicity analyses were based on the per-protocol population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov registration, number NCT02347423. FINDINGS: Between Feb 2, 2015, and Sept 26, 2015, we recruited 824 infants. The per-protocol population included 820 infants; 205 were randomly assigned to receive 1/3 IPV-Al, 205 to receive 1/5 IPV-Al, 204 to receive 1/10 IPV-Al, and 206 to receive IPV. The proportion of individuals meeting the primary endpoint of seroconversion for poliovirus types 1, 2, and 3 was already high for the three IPV-Al vaccines after two vaccinations, but was higher after three vaccinations (ie, after completion of the expanded programme of immunisation schedule): 1/3 IPV-Al 98·5% (n=202, type 1), 97·6% (n=200; type 2), and 99·5% (n=204, type 3); 1/5 IPV-Al: 99·5% (n=204, type 1), 96·1% (n=197, type 2), and 98·5% (n=202, type 3); and 1/10 IPV-Al: 98·5% (n=201, type 1), 94·6% (n=193, type 2), and 99·5% (n=203, type 3). All three IPV-Al were non-inferior to IPV, with absolute differences in percentage seroconversion for each poliovirus type being greater than -10% (1/3 IPV-Al type 1, -1·46 [-3·60 to 0·10], type 2, -0·98 [-3·62 to 1·49], and type 3, -0·49 [-2·16 to 0·86]; 1/5 IPV-Al type 1, -0·49 [-2·16 to 0·86], type 2, -2·45 [-5·47 to 0·27], and type 3, -1·46 [-3·60 to 0·10]; and 1/10 IPV-Al type 1, -1·47 [-3·62 to 0·10], type 2, -3·94 [-7·28 to -0·97], and type 3, -0·49 [-2·17 to 0·86]). Three serious adverse events occurred that were unrelated to the vaccine. INTERPRETATION: The lowest dose (1/10 IPV-Al) of the vaccine performed well both after two and three doses. Based on these results, this new vaccine is under investigation in phase 3 trials. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

First-in-human safety and immunogenicity investigations of three adjuvanted reduced dose inactivated poliovirus vaccines (IPV-Al SSI) compared to full dose IPV Vaccine SSI when given as a booster vaccination to adolescents with a history of IPV vaccination at 3, 5, 12months and 5years of age.

BACKGROUND: There is a demand of affordable IPV in the World. Statens Serum Institut (SSI) has developed three reduced dose IPV formulations adsorbed to aluminium hydroxide; 1/3 IPV-Al, 1/5 IPV-Al and 1/10 IPV-Al SSI, and now report the results of the first investigations in humans. METHODS: 240 Danish adolescents, aged 10-15years, and childhood vaccinated with IPV were booster vaccinated with 1/3 IPV-Al, 1/5 IPV-Al, 1/10 IPV-Al or IPV Vaccine SSI. The booster effects (GMTRs) of the three IPV-Al SSI were compared to IPV Vaccine SSI, and evaluated for non-inferiority. IMMUNOGENICITY RESULTS: The pre-vaccination GMTs were similar across the groups; 926 (type 1), 969 (type 2) and 846 (type 3) in the total trial population. The GMTRs by poliovirus type and IPV formulation were: Type 1: 17.0 (1/3 IPV-Al), 13.0 (1/5 IPV-Al), 7.1 (1/10 IPV-Al) and 42.2 (IPV Vaccine SSI). Type 2: 12.5 (1/3 IPV-Al), 13.1 (1/5 IPV-Al), 7.6 (1/10 IPV-Al) and 47.8 (IPV Vaccine SSI). Type 3: 14.5 (1/3 IPV-Al), 16.2 (1/5 IPV-Al), 8.9 (1/10 IPV-Al) and 62.4 (IPV Vaccine SSI) Thus, the three IPV-Al formulations were highly immunogenic, but inferior to IPV Vaccine SSI, in this booster vaccination trial. SAFETY RESULTS: No SAE and no AE of severe intensity occurred. 59.2% of the subjects reported at least one AE. Injection site pain was the most frequent AE in all groups; from 24.6% to 43.3%. Injection site redness and swelling frequencies were<5% in most and<10% in all groups. The most frequent systemic AEs were fatigue (from 8.2% to 15.0%) and headache (from 15.0% to 28.3%). Most AEs were of mild intensity. In conclusion, the three IPV-Al SSI were safe in adolescents and the booster effects were satisfactory. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT02280447.

A novel liposomal adjuvant system, CAF01, promotes long-lived Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific T-cell responses in human.

Here, we report on a first-in-man trial where the tuberculosis (TB) vaccine Ag85B-ESAT-6 (H1) was adjuvanted with escalating doses of a novel liposome adjuvant CAF01. On their own, protein antigens cannot sufficiently induce immune responses in humans, and require the addition of an adjuvant system to ensure appropriate delivery and concomitant immune activation. To date no approved adjuvants are available for induction of cellular immunity, which seems essential for a number of vaccines, including vaccines against TB. We vaccinated four groups of human volunteers: a non-adjuvanted H1 group, followed by three groups with escalating doses of CAF01-adjuvanted H1 vaccine. All subjects were vaccinated at 0 and 8 weeks and followed up for 150 weeks. Vaccination did not cause local or systemic adverse effects besides transient soreness at the injection site. Two vaccinations elicited strong antigen-specific T-cell responses which persisted after 150 weeks follow-up, indicating the induction of a long-lasting memory response in the vaccine recipients. These results show that CAF01 is a safe and tolerable, Th1-inducing adjuvant for human TB vaccination trials and for vaccination studies in general where cellular immunity is required.

Experience with monocomponent acellular pertussis combination vaccines for infants, children, adolescents and adults--a review of safety, immunogenicity, efficacy and effectiveness studies and 15 years of field experience.

Combination vaccines containing a monocomponent acellular pertussis (aP) vaccine, manufactured at Statens Serum Institut (SSI), Denmark, have successfully controlled Bordetella pertussis infections in Denmark since 1997. The efficacy of this aP vaccine was 71% in a double-blind, randomised and controlled clinical trial. Its safety and immunogenicity have been demonstrated in infants, children, adolescents and adults. In approximately 500,000 children it was effective against pertussis requiring hospitalisation (VE: 93% after 3 doses) and against pertussis not requiring hospitalisation (VE: 78% after 3 doses). IgG antibodies against pertussis toxin (IgG anti-PT) response rates after booster vaccination of adults with tetanus, diphtheria and aP combination vaccine (TdaP) were considerably higher for this monocomponent aP vaccine containing 20µg pertussis toxoid, inactivated by hydrogen peroxide (92.0%), than for two multicomponent aP vaccines inactivated by formaldehyde and/or glutaraldehyde: 3-component aP with 8µg pertussis toxoid (77.2%) and 5-component aP with 2.5µg pertussis toxoid (47.1%), without compromising the safety profile. In Denmark where this monocomponent aP vaccine has been the only pertussis vaccine in use for 15 years, there has been no pertussis epidemic since 2002 (population incidence 36 per 100,000), in contrast to neighbouring countries, where epidemics have occurred. This monocomponent aP vaccine can be used in combination vaccines for primary and booster vaccination against pertussis in all age groups and is an important tool for successful pertussis control.

A randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority clinical trial on the safety and immunogenicity of a tetanus, diphtheria and monocomponent acellular pertussis (TdaP) vaccine in comparison to a tetanus and diphtheria (Td) vaccine when given as booster vaccinations to healthy adults.

BACKGROUND: Increasing incidence of pertussis in adolescents and adults has stimulated the development of safe and immunogenic acellular pertussis vaccines for booster vaccination of adolescents and adults. PURPOSE: To obtain clinical documentation of the safety and immunogenicity of a tetanus, diphtheria and monocomponent acellular pertussis combination vaccine (TdaP), when given as a booster vaccination to adults. METHODS: The trial was double-blind, controlled and randomised. 802 healthy adults, aged 18-55 years who had completed childhood vaccination with diphtheria, tetanus and whole cell pertussis vaccine (DTwP), were booster vaccinated with TdaP or Td. Blood samples were taken before and one month after the vaccination for serological analysis and adverse events were recorded during the one-month-follow-up period. RESULTS: The monocomponent acellular pertussis vaccine (aP) in the TdaP vaccine was immunogenic in adults with 92.0% of TdaP vaccinated subjects obtaining an anti-pertussis toxin (anti-PT) antibody booster response. TdaP was non-inferior to Td in eliciting seroprotective anti-tetanus and diphtheria antibody concentrations with more than 98% of subjects obtaining post-vaccination seroprotective concentrations (≥ 0.1 IU/mL). T and d booster response rates were 93.0% and 97.5%, respectively. The frequencies of solicited local adverse reactions were low and comparable between TdaP and Td vaccinees. In the TdaP group, 30.7% reported pain, 4.2% swelling and 2.0% erythema at the injection site. The most frequent solicited general symptoms were headache (20.4%), fatigue (17.0%) and myalgia (10.0%). In the Td group, 35.7% reported pain, 2.5% swelling and 3.2% erythema at the injection site, whereas headache, fatigue and myalgia were reported by 15.7%, 14.5% and 12.5%, respectively. In conclusion, TdaP Vaccine SSI was safe and immunogenic when given as a booster vaccination to adults.

First-in-man open clinical trial of a combined rdESAT-6 and rCFP-10 tuberculosis specific skin test reagent.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculin is still the only available skin test reagent for the diagnosis of mycobacterial infection. The product has a remarkable sensitivity, but poor specificity. Previous studies, including two human phase I clinical trials, have indicated that rdESAT-6 has a potential as an improved skin test reagent. Animal studies have shown that the sensitivity may be increased by inclusion of the genetically related CFP-10 antigen in the preparation without loosing specificity. METHODOLOGY: In this study a Lactococcus fermented, recombinant skin test reagent consisting of a 1ratio1 wt/wt of rdESAT-6 and CFP-10 was manufactured according to GMP standards and tested for the first time in 42 healthy adult volunteers. The two doses of 0.01 microg or 0.1 microg were injected intradermally by the Mantoux technique with 6 or 12 weeks interval. No serious adverse events and only mild adverse reactions were reported. The reagent elicited a positive skin test reaction after the first injection in one participant, who most likely was latently infected with M. tuberculosis as indicated by an appreciable IFN gamma response just below the Quantiferon(R) cut-off level at the screening visit. None of the remaining participants in the four groups had any skin test reactions and sensitisation by the reagent could therefore be excluded. CONCLUSION: The investigational skin test reagent rdESAT-6 and CFP-10 appeared safe and non-sensitising in this first-in-man clinical trial in human volunteers and can now be tested in larger clinical trials involving individuals with latent M. tuberculosis infection or active TB disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00793702.

Transient facial nerve paralysis (Bell's palsy) following intranasal delivery of a genetically detoxified mutant of Escherichia coli heat labile toxin.

BACKGROUND: An association was previously established between facial nerve paralysis (Bell's palsy) and intranasal administration of an inactivated influenza virosome vaccine containing an enzymatically active Escherichia coli Heat Labile Toxin (LT) adjuvant. The individual component(s) responsible for paralysis were not identified, and the vaccine was withdrawn. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Subjects participating in two contemporaneous non-randomized Phase 1 clinical trials of nasal subunit vaccines against Human Immunodeficiency Virus and tuberculosis, both of which employed an enzymatically inactive non-toxic mutant LT adjuvant (LTK63), underwent active follow-up for adverse events using diary-cards and clinical examination. Two healthy subjects experienced transient peripheral facial nerve palsies 44 and 60 days after passive nasal instillation of LTK63, possibly a result of retrograde axonal transport after neuronal ganglioside binding or an inflammatory immune response, but without exaggerated immune responses to LTK63. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: While the unique anatomical predisposition of the facial nerve to compression suggests nasal delivery of neuronal-binding LT-derived adjuvants is inadvisable, their continued investigation as topical or mucosal adjuvants and antigens appears warranted on the basis of longstanding safety via oral, percutaneous, and other mucosal routes.

Risk of sensitization in healthy adults following repeated administration of rdESAT-6 skin test reagent by the Mantoux injection technique.

Limited specificity of the tuberculin skin test incited the development of the intradermal Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific rdESAT-6 skin test. Animal studies have shown, however, that there is a possible risk of sensitization when repeated injections of rdESAT-6 are given. The aim of this phase 1 open clinical trial was to assess the sensitization risk and safety of repeated administration of rdESAT-6 reagent in 31 healthy adult volunteers. Three groups of volunteers received two fixed doses of 0.1 microg rdESAT-6 28, 56 or 112 days apart, respectively. After the second injection, the diameter of induration and/or redness at the injection site was measured and taken as a possible sensitization reaction if >5mm. In vitro interferon gamma (IFN-gamma) responses were measured as supportive evidence. Local adverse reactions at the injection site and adverse events were recorded. One out of 31 (3%) volunteers showed a positive skin reaction (sensitization) upon a second injection of rdESAT-6 after 28days and an increased IFN-gamma response to ESAT-6. For 7 (23%) of the volunteers, local adverse reactions related to the product were registered, but all reactions were mild and predictable. In conclusion, repeated injections of the rdESAT-6 skin test reagent are safe, and sensitization occurs at a low rate, especially if the time span between succeeding doses is wide.

Safety and immunogenicity of a DTaP-IPV(Vero) (serum-free) combination vaccine in comparison to DTaP-IPV(Mkc) when administered simultaneously with Haemophilus influenzae type B conjugate vaccine (PRP-T) in children at 2, 3.5, 5 and 16 months of age.

In a phase III, double blind, randomized, noninferiority, multi-centre clinical trial, 817 infants were included and randomly assigned to vaccination with DTaP-IPV(Vero) (N=410) or DTaP-IPV(Mkc) (N=407) vaccines (Statens Serum Institut (SSI), Denmark) in the right thigh. All infants were vaccinated with Act-HIB (Sanofi Pasteur, France) in the left thigh at the same time. The vaccination schedule was 2, 3.5, 5 and 16 months and serum samples were obtained at 6, 16 and 17 months. The primary objective was to demonstrate noninferiority of DTaP-IPV(Vero) to DTaP-IPV(Mkc) as regards immunological protection against polio virus types 1, 2 and 3. Furthermore, the immunogenicity of all vaccine antigens and the safety profile of the vaccines were assessed. The study demonstrated that DTaP-IPV(Vero) was noninferior to DTaP-IPV(Mkc). All antibody concentrations/titres remained at an acceptable level from the end of the primary vaccination series (i.e. 2, 3.5 and 5 months) until the time of the booster vaccination at 16 months. A good booster response was, furthermore, demonstrated for all antigens. No vaccine-related serious adverse events and no injection site granulomas or swelling of the entire thigh occurred. The frequencies of local injection site erythema and swelling as well as systemic adverse events such as fever, irritability, somnolence and decreased appetite were low and acceptable in both treatment groups. In conclusion, DTaP-IPV(Vero) is immunogenic and safe for primary vaccination and for booster vaccination of healthy children.

Double-blind randomized Phase I study comparing rdESAT-6 to tuberculin as skin test reagent in the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection.

Limited specificity of the tuberculin skin test incited the development of in vitro assays based on Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific antigens such as ESAT-6 that are lacking in Bacillus Calmette Guérin (BCG). In animal studies, intradermal ESAT-6 was safe and induced specific skin test responses. The aim of the study was to assess the safety of intradermal recombinant dimer ESAT-6 (rdESAT-6) compared with tuberculin and to determine the human dose. The study design was a double-blind Phase I study with intra-subject randomization to the left and right forearm, comparing 2 Tuberculin Units (TU) intradermal tuberculin (RT23) with 0.01, 0.1, 1 or 10 microg rdESAT-6 in groups of five healthy controls or treated tuberculosis (TB) patients. The risk of sensitization after skin testing was assessed in healthy volunteers. All doses were tolerated well by healthy volunteers and responses to rdESAT-6 were limited to transient redness after 24 h only at the highest dose. No sensitization was observed. Because 1 microg rdESAT-6 induced large responses with local side effects in some TB patients, the 10 microg dose of rdESAT-6 was not tested. Mean responses to 0.01, 0.1 and 1 microg rdESAT-6 measured 14.0, 19.8 and 38.8 mm of redness, respectively, and 7.0, 13.4 and 14.6 mm of induration. The response to tuberculin was similar to the responses to 0.1 microg rdESAT-6. Mild local side effects due to tuberculin and rdESAT-6 were observed in 8/15, respectively, 6/15 patients, more pronounced at the highest rdESAT-6 dose. In conclusion, this pilot Phase I study of safety, feasibility and dose finding of intradermal rdESAT-6 provides proof of principle of a specific skin test for human use. No serious adverse events were observed but the study was not sufficiently powered to demonstrate complete safety. Intradermal rdESAT-6 did not seem to sensitize healthy volunteers. In treated TB patients, responses to rdESAT-6 were optimal at 0.1 microg. Further studies are needed to evaluate sensitization after repeated doses and to study the effect of additional CFP-10 on the sensitivity of a TB-specific skin test.

Safety and immunogenicity of a booster dose of inactivated poliovirus vaccine produced in vero-cells.

Statens Serum Institut has developed a new vero-cell culturing technique for the manufacturing of inactivated poliovirus vaccine (IPV). This technique implies that the cultivation of cells and poliovirus is performed in a medium free of materials of animal origin and free of antibiotics. In a double-blind randomised clinical trial, IPV(vero) manufactured by this new technique was compared to conventionally produced IPV(mkc). One hundred and twenty-nine (129) healthy adult volunteers were given booster vaccinations of IPV(vero) (65) or IPV(mkc) (64). Both vaccines were well tolerated and resulted in excellent booster responses. No statistically significant differences were seen between the study groups.