Preschool-Aged Household Contacts as a Risk Factor for Viral Respiratory Infections in Healthcare Personnel.

Background: Viral respiratory infections (VRIs) are common and are occupational risks for healthcare personnel (HCP). VRIs can also be acquired at home and other settings among HCPs. We sought to determine if preschool-aged household contacts are a risk factor for VRIs among HCPs working in outpatient settings. Methods: We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a cluster randomized trial at 7 medical centers in the United States over 4 influenza seasons from 2011-2012 to 2014-2015. Adult HCPs who routinely came within 6 feet of patients with respiratory infections were included. Participants were tested for respiratory viruses whenever symptomatic and at 2 random times each season when asymptomatic. The exposure of interest was the number of household contacts 0-5 years old (preschool-aged) at the beginning of each HCP-season. The primary outcome was the rate of polymerase chain reaction-detected VRIs, regardless of symptoms. The VRI incidence rate ratio (IRR) was calculated using a mixed-effects Poisson regression model that accounted for clustering at the clinic level. Results: Among the 4476 HCP-seasons, most HCPs were female (85.4%) and between 30 and 49 years of age (54.6%). The overall VRI rate was 2.04 per 100 person-weeks. In the adjusted analysis, HCPs having 1 (IRR, 1.22 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.05-1.43]) and ≥2 (IRR, 1.35 [95% CI, 1.09-1.67]) preschool-aged household contacts had higher VRI rates than those with zero preschool-aged household contacts. Conclusions: Preschool-aged household contacts are a risk factor for developing VRIs among HCPs working in outpatient settings.

A phase 1 dose-sparing, randomized clinical trial of seasonal trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine combined with MAS-1, a novel water-in-oil adjuvant/delivery system.

BACKGROUND: New influenza vaccines are needed to increase vaccine efficacy. Adjuvants may allow hemagglutinin (HA) dose-sparing with enhanced immunogenicity. MAS-1 is an investigational low viscosity, free-flowing, water-in-oil emulsion-based adjuvant/delivery system comprised of stable nanoglobular aqueous droplets. METHODS: A phase 1, double-blind, safety and immunogenicity, HA dose escalation, randomized clinical trial was conducted. MAS-1 adjuvant with 1, 3, 5 or 9 µg per HA derived from licensed seasonal trivalent high dose inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV, Fluzone HD 60 µg per HA) in a 0.3 mL dose were compared to standard dose IIV (Fluzone SD, 15 µg per HA). Safety was measured by reactogenicity, adverse events, and clinical laboratory tests. Serum hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibody titers were measured for immunogenicity. RESULTS: Seventy-two subjects, aged 18-47 years, received one dose of either 0.3 mL adjuvanted vaccine or SD IIV intramuscularly. Common injection site and systemic reactions post-vaccination were mild tenderness, induration, pain, headache, myalgia, malaise and fatigue. All reactions resolved within 14 days post-vaccination. Safety laboratory measures were not different between groups. Geometric mean antibody titers, geometric mean fold increases in antibody titer, seroconversion rates and seroprotection rates against vaccine strains were in general higher and of longer duration (day 85 and 169 visits) with MAS-1-adjuvanted IIV at all doses of HA compared with SD IIV. Adjuvanted vaccine induced higher antibody responses against a limited number of non-study vaccine influenza B and A/H3N2 viruses including ones from subsequent years. CONCLUSION: MAS-1 adjuvant in a 0.3 mL dose volume provided HA dose-sparing effects without safety concerns and induced higher HAI antibody and seroconversion responses through at least 6 months, demonstrating potential to provide greater vaccine efficacy throughout an influenza season in younger adults. In summary, MAS-1 may provide enhanced, more durable and broader protective immunity compared with non-adjuvanted SD IIV. Clinical Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT02500680.

MAS-1, a novel water-in-oil adjuvant/delivery system, with reduced seasonal influenza vaccine hemagglutinin dose may enhance potency, durability and cross-reactivity of antibody responses in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Increased influenza vaccine efficacy is needed in the elderly at high-risk for morbidity and mortality due to influenza infection. Adjuvants may allow hemagglutinin (HA) dose-sparing with enhanced immunogenicity. MAS-1 is an investigational water-in-oil emulsion-based adjuvant/delivery system comprised of stable nanoglobular aqueous droplets. METHODS: A phase 1, randomized, double-blind, safety and immunogenicity, adjuvant dose escalation trial was conducted in persons aged 65 years and older. MAS-1 adjuvant dose volumes at 0.3 mL or 0.5 mL containing 9 µg per HA derived from licensed seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine (IIV, Fluzone HD 60 µg per HA, Sanofi Pasteur) were compared to high dose (HD) IIV (Fluzone HD). Safety was measured by reactogenicity, adverse events, and safety laboratory measures. Immunogenicity was assessed by serum hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibody titers. RESULTS: Forty-five subjects, aged 65-83 years, were randomly assigned to receive 9 µg per HA in 0.3 mL MAS-1 (15 subjects) or HD IIV (15 subjects) followed by groups randomly assigned to receive 9 µg per HA in 0.5 mL MAS-1 (10 subjects) or HD IIV (5 subjects). Injection site tenderness, induration, and pain, and headache, myalgia, malaise and fatigue were common, resolving before day 14 post-vaccination. Clinically significant late-onset injection site reactions occurred in four of ten subjects at the 0.5 mL adjuvant dose. Safety laboratory measures were within acceptable limits. MAS-1-adjuvanted IIV enhanced mean antibody titers, mean-fold increases in antibody titer, and seroconversion rates against vaccine strains for at least 168 days post-vaccination and enhanced cross-reactive antibodies against some non-study vaccine influenza viruses. CONCLUSION: MAS-1 adjuvant provided HA dose-sparing without safety concerns at the 0.3 mL dose, but the 0.5 mL dose caused late injection site reactions. MAS-1-adjuvanted IIV induced higher HAI antibody responses with prolonged durability including against historical strains, thereby providing greater potential vaccine efficacy in the elderly throughout an influenza season. Clinical Trial Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT02500680.

Influence of Preseason Antibodies Against Influenza Virus on Risk of Influenza Infection Among Healthcare Personnel.

BACKGROUND: The association of hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibodies with protection from influenza among healthcare personnel (HCP) with occupational exposure to influenza viruses has not been well-described. METHODS: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial was a cluster-randomized, multisite study that compared medical masks to N95 respirators in preventing viral respiratory infections among HCP in outpatient healthcare settings for 5180 participant-seasons. Serum HAI antibody titers before each influenza season and influenza virus infection confirmed by polymerase chain reaction were studied over 4 study years. RESULTS: In univariate models, the risk of influenza A(H3N2) and B virus infections was associated with HAI titers to each virus, study year, and site. HAI titers were strongly associated with vaccination. Within multivariate models, each log base 2 increase in titer was associated with 15%, 26% and 33%-35% reductions in the hazard of influenza A(H3N2), A(H1N1), and B infections, respectively. Best models included preseason antibody titers and study year, but not other variables. CONCLUSIONS: HAI titers were associated with protection from influenza among HCP with routine exposure to patients with respiratory illness and influenza season contributed to risk. HCP can be reassured about receiving influenza vaccination to stimulate immunity.

Impact of mandatory vaccination of healthcare personnel on rates of influenza and other viral respiratory pathogens.

OBJECTIVE: The implementation of mandatory influenza vaccination policies among healthcare personnel (HCP) is controversial. Thus, we examined the affect of mandatory influenza vaccination policies among HCP working in outpatient settings. SETTING: Four Veterans' Affairs (VA) health systems and three non-VA medical centers. METHODS: We analyzed rates of influenza and other viral causes of respiratory infections among HCP working in outpatient sites at 4 VA health systems without mandatory influenza vaccination policies and 3 non-VA health systems with mandatory influenza vaccination policies. RESULTS: Influenza vaccination was associated with a decreased risk of influenza (odds ratio, 0.17; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.22) but an increased risk of other respiratory viral infections (incidence rate ratio, 1.26; 95% CI, 1.02-1.57). CONCLUSIONS: Our fitted regression models suggest that if influenza vaccination rates in clinics where vaccination was not mandated had equalled those where vaccine was mandated, HCP influenza infections would have been reduced by 52.1% (95% CI, 51.3%-53.0%). These observations, their possible causes, and additional strategies to reduce influenza and other viral respiratory illnesses among HCP working in ambulatory clinics warrant further investigation.

Outpatient healthcare personnel knowledge and attitudes towards infection prevention measures for protection from respiratory infections.

BACKGROUND: Healthcare personnel (HCP) knowledge and attitudes toward infection control measures are important determinants of practices that can protect them from transmission of infectious diseases. METHODS: Healthcare personnel were recruited from Emergency Departments and outpatient clinics at seven sites. They completed knowledge surveys at the beginning and attitude surveys at the beginning and end of each season of participation. Attitudes toward infection prevention and control measures, especially medical masks and N95 respirators, were compared. The proportion of participants who correctly identified all components of an infection control bundle for seven clinical scenarios was calculated. RESULTS: The proportion of participants in the medical mask group who reported at least one reason to avoid using medical masks fell from 88.5% on the pre-season survey to 39.6% on the post-season survey (odds ratio [OR] for preseason vs. postseason 0.11, 95% CI 0.10-0.14). Among those wearing N95 respirators, the proportion fell from 87.9% to 53.6% (OR 0.24, 95% CI 0.21-0.28). Participants correctly identified all components of the infection control bundle for 4.9% to 38.5% of scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Attitudes toward medical masks and N95 respirators improved significantly between the beginning and end of each season. The proportion of HCP who correctly identified the infection control precautions needed for clinical scenarios was low, but it improved over successive years of participation in the study.

Take-home kits to detect respiratory viruses among healthcare personnel: Lessons learned from a cluster randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Health care personnel (HCP) working in outpatient settings routinely interact with patients with acute respiratory illnesses. Absenteeism following symptom development and lack of staff trained to obtain samples limit efforts to identify pathogens among infected HCP. METHODS: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial assessed respiratory infection incidence among HCP between 2011 and 2015. Research assistants obtained anterior nasal and oropharyngeal swabs from HCP in the workplace following development of respiratory illness symptoms and randomly while asymptomatic. Participants received take-home kits to self-collect swabs when absent from work. Samples mailed to a central laboratory were tested for respiratory viruses by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. RESULTS: Among 2,862 participants, 3,467 swabs were obtained from symptomatic participants. Among symptomatic HCP, respiratory virus was detected in 904 of 3,467 (26.1%) samples. Self-collected samples by symptomatic HCP at home had higher rates of viral detection (40.3%) compared to 24% obtained by trained research assistants in the workplace (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized clinical trial, take-home kits were an easily implemented, effective method to self-collect samples by HCP. Other studies have previously shown relative equivalence of self-collected samples to those obtained by trained healthcare workers. Take-home kit self-collection could diminish workforce exposures and decrease the demand for personnel protective equipment worn to protect workers who collect respiratory samples.

Risk Factors for Healthcare Personnel Infection With Endemic Coronaviruses (HKU1, OC43, NL63, 229E): Results from the Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT).

BACKGROUND: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) presents a large risk to healthcare personnel (HCP). Quantifying the risk of coronavirus infection associated with workplace activities is an urgent need. METHODS: We assessed the association of worker characteristics, occupational roles and behaviors, and participation in procedures with the risk of endemic coronavirus infection among HCP who participated in the Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT), a cluster randomized trial to assess personal protective equipment to prevent respiratory infections and illness conducted from 2011 to 2016. RESULTS: Among 4689 HCP seasons, we detected coronavirus infection in 387 (8%). HCP who participated in an aerosol-generating procedure (AGP) at least once during the viral respiratory season were 105% (95% confidence interval, 21%-240%) more likely to be diagnosed with a laboratory-confirmed coronavirus infection. Younger individuals, those who saw pediatric patients, and those with household members <5 years of age were at increased risk of coronavirus infection. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis suggests that the risk of HCP becoming infected with an endemic coronavirus increases approximately 2-fold with exposures to AGPs. Our findings may be relevant to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic; however, SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, may differ from endemic coronaviruses in important ways. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01249625.

Antibodies to coronaviruses are higher in older compared with younger adults and binding antibodies are more sensitive than neutralizing antibodies in identifying coronavirus-associated illnesses.

Human coronaviruses (HCoV) are common causes of respiratory illnesses (RI) despite preexisting humoral immunity. Sera were obtained near the onset of RI and 3 to 4 weeks later as part of a prospective study of 200 subjects evaluated for RI from 2009 to 2013. Antibodies against common HCoV strains were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and neutralization assay comparing older adults with cardiopulmonary diseases (99 subjects) to younger, healthy adults (101 subjects). Virus shedding was detected in respiratory secretions by polymerase chain reaction. Of 43 HCoV-associated illnesses, 15 (35%) occurred in 14 older adults (aged ≥60 years) and 28 (65%) in 28 younger adults (aged 21-40 years). Binding and neutralizing antibodies were higher in older adults. Only 16 (35.7%) of RI with increases in binding antibodies also had increases in neutralizing antibodies to HCoV. Increases in binding antibodies with RI were more frequent than increased neutralizing antibodies and virus shedding, and more frequent in younger compared to older adults. Functional neutralizing antibodies were not stimulated as often as binding antibodies, explaining in part a susceptibility to reinfection with HCoV. Monitoring binding antibodies may be more sensitive for the serologic detection of HCoV infections.

N95 Respirators vs Medical Masks for Preventing Influenza Among Health Care Personnel: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Clinical studies have been inconclusive about the effectiveness of N95 respirators and medical masks in preventing health care personnel (HCP) from acquiring workplace viral respiratory infections. Objective: To compare the effect of N95 respirators vs medical masks for prevention of influenza and other viral respiratory infections among HCP. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cluster randomized pragmatic effectiveness study conducted at 137 outpatient study sites at 7 US medical centers between September 2011 and May 2015, with final follow-up in June 2016. Each year for 4 years, during the 12-week period of peak viral respiratory illness, pairs of outpatient sites (clusters) within each center were matched and randomly assigned to the N95 respirator or medical mask groups. Interventions: Overall, 1993 participants in 189 clusters were randomly assigned to wear N95 respirators (2512 HCP-seasons of observation) and 2058 in 191 clusters were randomly assigned to wear medical masks (2668 HCP-seasons) when near patients with respiratory illness. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza. Secondary outcomes included incidence of acute respiratory illness, laboratory-detected respiratory infections, laboratory-confirmed respiratory illness, and influenzalike illness. Adherence to interventions was assessed. Results: Among 2862 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 43 [11.5] years; 2369 [82.8%]) women), 2371 completed the study and accounted for 5180 HCP-seasons. There were 207 laboratory-confirmed influenza infection events (8.2% of HCP-seasons) in the N95 respirator group and 193 (7.2% of HCP-seasons) in the medical mask group (difference, 1.0%, [95% CI, -0.5% to 2.5%]; P = .18) (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 1.18 [95% CI, 0.95-1.45]). There were 1556 acute respiratory illness events in the respirator group vs 1711 in the mask group (difference, -21.9 per 1000 HCP-seasons [95% CI, -48.2 to 4.4]; P = .10); 679 laboratory-detected respiratory infections in the respirator group vs 745 in the mask group (difference, -8.9 per 1000 HCP-seasons, [95% CI, -33.3 to 15.4]; P = .47); 371 laboratory-confirmed respiratory illness events in the respirator group vs 417 in the mask group (difference, -8.6 per 1000 HCP-seasons [95% CI, -28.2 to 10.9]; P = .39); and 128 influenzalike illness events in the respirator group vs 166 in the mask group (difference, -11.3 per 1000 HCP-seasons [95% CI, -23.8 to 1.3]; P = .08). In the respirator group, 89.4% of participants reported "always" or "sometimes" wearing their assigned devices vs 90.2% in the mask group. Conclusions and Relevance: Among outpatient health care personnel, N95 respirators vs medical masks as worn by participants in this trial resulted in no significant difference in the incidence of laboratory-confirmed influenza. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01249625.

Protecting Healthcare Personnel in Outpatient Settings: The Influence of Mandatory Versus Nonmandatory Influenza Vaccination Policies on Workplace Absenteeism During Multiple Respiratory Virus Seasons.

OBJECTIVE To determine the effect of mandatory and nonmandatory influenza vaccination policies on vaccination rates and symptomatic absenteeism among healthcare personnel (HCP). DESIGN Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING This study took place at 3 university medical centers with mandatory influenza vaccination policies and 4 Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare systems with nonmandatory influenza vaccination policies. PARTICIPANTS The study included 2,304 outpatient HCP at mandatory vaccination sites and 1,759 outpatient HCP at nonmandatory vaccination sites. METHODS To determine the incidence and duration of absenteeism in outpatient settings, HCP participating in the Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial at both mandatory and nonmandatory vaccination sites over 3 viral respiratory illness (VRI) seasons (2012-2015) reported their influenza vaccination status and symptomatic days absent from work weekly throughout a 12-week period during the peak VRI season each year. The adjusted effects of vaccination and other modulating factors on absenteeism rates were estimated using multivariable regression models. RESULTS The proportion of participants who received influenza vaccination was lower each year at nonmandatory than at mandatory vaccination sites (odds ratio [OR], 0.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.11). Among HCP who reported at least 1 sick day, vaccinated HCP had lower symptomatic days absent compared to unvaccinated HCP (OR for 2012-2013 and 2013-2014, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.72-0.93; OR for 2014-2015, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.69-0.95). CONCLUSIONS These data suggest that mandatory HCP influenza vaccination policies increase influenza vaccination rates and that HCP symptomatic absenteeism diminishes as rates of influenza vaccination increase. These findings should be considered in formulating HCP influenza vaccination policies. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2018;39:452-461.

Interpatient mutational spectrum of human coronavirus-OC43 revealed by illumina sequencing.

Human coronaviruses (HCoV) are RNA viruses that cause respiratory tract infections with viral replication of limited duration. The host and viral population heterogeneity could influence clinical phenotypes. Employing long RT-PCR with Illumina sequencing, we quantified the gene mutation load at 0.5% mutation frequency for the 4529 bp-domain spanning the Spike gene (4086 bp) of HCoV-OC43 in four upper respiratory clinical specimens obtained during acute illness. There were a total of 121 mutations for all four HCoV samples with the average number of mutations at 30.3 ± 10.2, which is significantly higher than that expected from the Illumina sequencing error rate. There were two mutation peaks, one at the 5' end and the other near position 1 550 in the S1 subunit. Two coronavirus samples were genotype B and two were genotype D, clustering with HCoV-OC43 strain AY391777 in neighbor-joining tree phylogenetic analysis. Nonsynonymous mutations were 76.1 ± 14% of mutation load. Although lower than other RNA viruses such as hepatitis C virus, HCoV-OC43 did exhibit quasi-species. The rate of nonsynonymous mutations was higher in the HCoV-OC43 isolates than in hepatitis C (HCV) virus genotype 1a isolates analyzed for comparison in this study. These characteristics of HCoV-OC43 may affect viral replication dynamics, receptor binding, antigenicity, evolution, transmission, and clinical illness.

The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT): a cluster-randomized comparison of respirator and medical mask effectiveness against respiratory infections in healthcare personnel.

BACKGROUND: Although N95 filtering facepiece respirators and medical masks are commonly used for protection against respiratory infections in healthcare settings, more clinical evidence is needed to understand the optimal settings and exposure circumstances for healthcare personnel to use these devices. A lack of clinically germane research has led to equivocal, and occasionally conflicting, healthcare respiratory protection recommendations from public health organizations, professional societies, and experts. METHODS: The Respiratory Protection Effectiveness Clinical Trial (ResPECT) is a prospective comparison of respiratory protective equipment to be conducted at multiple U.S. study sites. Healthcare personnel who work in outpatient settings will be cluster-randomized to wear N95 respirators or medical masks for protection against infections during respiratory virus season. Outcome measures will include laboratory-confirmed viral respiratory infections, acute respiratory illness, and influenza-like illness. Participant exposures to patients, coworkers, and others with symptoms and signs of respiratory infection, both within and beyond the workplace, will be recorded in daily diaries. Adherence to study protocols will be monitored by the study team. DISCUSSION: ResPECT is designed to better understand the extent to which N95s and MMs reduce clinical illness among healthcare personnel. A fully successful study would produce clinically relevant results that help clinician-leaders make reasoned decisions about protection of healthcare personnel against occupationally acquired respiratory infections and prevention of spread within healthcare systems. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT01249625 (11/29/2010).

Coronavirus and Other Respiratory Illnesses Comparing Older with Young Adults.

BACKGROUND: Study of human coronavirus and other virus-associated respiratory illnesses is needed to describe their clinical effects on chronically ill, older adults. METHODS: A prospective study during 2009 to 2013 clinically assessed acute respiratory illnesses soon after onset and 3 to 4 weeks later in patients aged ≥60 years with chronic lung and heart diseases (group 1, 100 subjects) and healthy adults aged 18 to 40 years (group 2, 101 subjects). Respiratory secretions were tested for nucleic acids of a panel of respiratory viruses. An increase in antibody titer was assessed for 4 coronavirus strains. RESULTS: Virus-associated illnesses (29 [39.1%] of 74 illnesses in group 1 and 59 [48.7%] of 121 illnesses in group 2) occurred in all calendar quarters, most commonly in the first and fourth quarters. Coronaviruses (group 1: 14 [18.9%] illnesses; group 2: 26 [21.5%] illnesses) and enteroviruses/rhinoviruses (group 1: 14 [18.9%] illnesses; group 2: 37 [30.6%] illnesses) were most common. Virus co-infections occurred in 10 illnesses. Illnesses with 9 to 11 symptoms were more common in group 1 (17 [23.0%]) than in group 2 (15 [12.4%]) (P < .05). Compared with group 2, more group 1 subjects reported dyspnea, more severe disease of longer duration, and treatment for acute illness with prednisone and antibiotics. Coronavirus-associated illnesses (percent of illnesses, group 1 vs group 2) were characterized by myalgias (21% vs 68%, P < .01), chills (50% vs 52%), dyspnea (71% vs 24%, P < .01), headache (64% vs 72%), malaise (64% vs 84%), cough (86% vs 68%), sputum production (86% vs 60%), sore throat (64% vs 80%), and nasal congestion (93% vs 96%). CONCLUSIONS: Respiratory illnesses were commonly associated with coronaviruses and enteroviruses/rhinoviruses affecting chronically ill, older patients more than healthy, young adults.

Safety and immunogenicity of a quadrivalent intradermal influenza vaccine in adults.

BACKGROUND: An intradermal (ID) trivalent split-virion influenza vaccine (IIV3-ID) (Fluzone(®) Intradermal, Sanofi Pasteur, Swiftwater, PA) has been available in the US since the 2011/2012 influenza season for adults aged 18-64 years. This study examined whether adding a second B-lineage strain affects immunogenicity and safety. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, multicentre trial evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of an intradermal quadrivalent split-virion influenza vaccine (IIV4-ID) in adults 18-64 years of age in the US during the 2012-2013 influenza season. Participants were randomized 2:1:1 to receive a single injection of IIV4-ID, licensed IIV3-ID, or an investigational IIV3-ID containing the alternate B-lineage strain. Haemagglutination inhibition antibody titres were assessed in two-thirds of participants before vaccination and 28 days after vaccination. RESULTS: 1672 participants were vaccinated with IIV4-ID, 837 with licensed IIV3-ID, and 846 with an investigational IIV3-ID. For all four vaccine strains, antibody responses to IIV4-ID were statistically non-inferior to the response to the IIV3-ID vaccines containing the matched strains. For both B strains, post-vaccination antibody responses to IIV4-ID were statistically superior to the responses to IIV3-ID lacking the corresponding B strain. Adverse events were similar for IIV4-ID and IIV3-ID. The most commonly reported solicited reactions were pain, pruritus, myalgia, headache, and malaise; and most were grade 1 or 2 and appeared and resolved within 3 days of vaccination. IIV4-ID was statistically non-inferior to the two pooled IIV3-ID vaccines for the proportions of participants with at least one grade 2 or 3 systemic reaction. CONCLUSIONS: Antibody responses to the IIV4-ID were non-inferior to IIV3-ID for the A and matched B strains and superior for the unmatched B strains. IIV4-ID was well tolerated without any safety concerns. IIV4-ID may help address an unmet need due to mismatched B strains in previous influenza vaccines.

Phase I/II randomized trial of safety and immunogenicity of LIPO-5 alone, ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452) alone, and ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452) prime/LIPO-5 boost in healthy, HIV-1-uninfected adult participants.

Finding an effective human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) vaccine remains a major global health priority. In a phase I/II, placebo-controlled trial, healthy, HIV-1-negative adults were randomized to receive one of 5 vaccine regimens: LIPO-5 (combination of 5 lipopeptides) alone (250 µg), ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452) alone, or 3 groups of ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452) followed by ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452) plus LIPO-5 (250, 750, and 2,500 µg). Only 73/174 participants (42%) received all four vaccinations due to a study halt related to myelitis. There were no significant differences in systemic reactions between groups or in local reactogenicity between groups receiving ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452). Significant differences in local reactogenicity occurred between groups receiving LIPO-5 (P ≤ 0.05). Gag and Env antibodies were undetectable by ELISA 2 weeks after the fourth vaccination for all but one recipient. Antibodies to Gag and Env were present in 32% and 24% of recipients of ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452) alone and in 47% and 35% of ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452)+LIPO recipients, respectively. Coadministration of LIPO-5 did not significantly increase the response rate compared to ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452) alone, nor was there a significant relationship between dose and antibody responses among ALVAC-HIV (vCP1452)+LIPO groups. Over 90% of study participants had no positive gamma interferon (IFN-γ) enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot assay (ELISpot) responses to any peptide pool at any time point. The study was halted due to a case of myelitis possibly related to the LIPO-5 vaccine; this case of myelitis remains an isolated event. In general, there was no appreciable cell-mediated immunity detected in response to the vaccines used in this study, and antibody responses were limited. The clinical trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov with registry number NCT00076063.

Immunogenicity and safety of Fluzone(®) intradermal and high-dose influenza vaccines in older adults ≥65 years of age: a randomized, controlled, phase II trial.

We conducted a randomized, controlled, multicenter, phase II study to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of an investigational intradermal (ID) trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) and a high-dose (HD) intramuscular (IM) TIV in older adults (≥65 years of age). Older adult subjects were immunized with ID vaccine containing either 15µg hemagglutinin (HA)/strain (n=636) or 21µg HA/strain (n=634), with HD IM vaccine containing 60µg HA/strain (n=320), or with standard-dose (SD) IM vaccine (Fluzone(®); 15µg HA/strain; n=319). For comparison, younger adults (18-49 years of age) were immunized with SD IM vaccine. In older adults, post-vaccination geometric mean titers induced by the ID vaccines were superior to those induced by the SD IM vaccine for the A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 strains and non-inferior for the B strain. Seroconversion rates induced by the ID vaccines were superior to those induced by the SD IM vaccine in older adults for the A/H1N1 and B strains and non-inferior for the A/H3N2 strain. Results did not differ significantly for the two ID vaccine dosages. Post-vaccination geometric mean titers, seroconversion rates, and most seroprotection rates were significantly higher in HD vaccine recipients than in older adult recipients of the SD IM or ID vaccines and, for most measures, were comparable to those of younger adult SD IM vaccine recipients. Injection-site reactions, but not systemic reactions or unsolicited adverse events, were more common with the ID vaccines than with the IM vaccines. No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. This study demonstrated that: (1) the ID and HD vaccines were well-tolerated and more immunogenic than the SD IM vaccine in older adults; (2) the HD vaccine was more immunogenic than the ID vaccines in older adults; and (3) the HD vaccine in older adults and the SD IM vaccine in younger adults elicited comparable antibody responses (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier no.: NCT00551031).

Safety and immunogenicity of revaccination with reduced dose intradermal and standard dose intramuscular influenza vaccines in adults 18-64 years of age.

BACKGROUND: This clinical trial examined the safety and immunogenicity of annual revaccination with Fluzone(®) Intradermal (Sanofi Pasteur, Swiftwater, PA) vaccine compared to a standard intramuscular (IM) split-virion trivalent influenza vaccine (Fluzone(®), Sanofi Pasteur). METHODS: This phase II, active-controlled, multi-centre, open-label trial was conducted in 2009 and 2010, and enrolled 1250 adults 18-64 years of age who were randomly selected from participants in a phase III influenza vaccine trial the previous year (NCT00772109). Subjects who had previously received the ID vaccine were randomized 2:1 to be revaccinated with the ID or IM vaccine and those who previously received the IM vaccine were randomized 1:1. Solicited reactions were recorded on the day of vaccination and continuing for the next 7 days, non-serious adverse events for 28 days, and serious adverse events for 6 months after vaccination. Hemagglutination inhibition antibody titres were assessed pre-vaccination and at day 28. RESULTS: Reactions were well-tolerated and resolved in the first 7 days, but erythema, induration, swelling, pruritus and ecchymosis were reported by more subjects receiving the ID vaccine than the IM vaccine. Compared to receipt of IM vaccine in the previous year, ID vaccine in the previous year led to statistically higher rates of erythema, swelling and induration after IM vaccine in the second year. Injection-site pain and systemic reactions did not differ between ID and IM vaccines. No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. Geometric mean antibody titres, seroprotection rates, and seroconversion rates were non-inferior for the ID and IM vaccines for all three viral strains. CONCLUSIONS: The ID vaccine was as immunogenic as the IM vaccine, and raised no safety concerns. It can be used interchangeably with the IM vaccine for annual revaccination in adults 18-64 years of age in consecutive years without safety concerns.

Intradermally-administered influenza virus vaccine is safe and immunogenic in healthy adults 18-64 years of age.

BACKGROUND: To increase vaccine acceptance, intradermal (ID) influenza vaccine (Fluzone(®) Intradermal, Sanofi Pasteur Inc.) may be an attractive alternative to intramuscular (IM) vaccination due to smaller needle and volume injected. METHODS: A multicenter, randomized (2:1 ID vs IM vaccines) study, blinded for ID vaccine lots, was conducted among 4292 adults 18-64 years of age enrolled in October 2008. Three lots of investigational trivalent influenza vaccine containing 9µg hemagglutinin (HA) per strain in 0.1mL administered ID with a 30 gauge, 1.5mm long needle were compared to standard dose vaccine (0.5mL containing 15µg HA/strain) given IM. RESULTS: The post-vaccination antibody geometric mean titers (GMT) for the ID vaccine were similar to the IM vaccine (H1N1: 193.2 vs. 178.3, H3N2: 246.7 vs. 230.7, and B: 102.5 vs. 126.9). Non-inferiority was met for the ID vaccine compared to IM vaccine as assessed by antibody GMT ratios (IM/ID) for all three virus strains (H1N1: 0.92, H3N2: 0.94, and B: 1.24). Seroconversion rates were non-inferior for H1N1 and H3N2, but not for B (ID vs. IM: H1N1: 61.2% vs. 60.5%, H3N2: 75.3% vs. 74.8%, and B: 46.2% vs. 54.2%). Seroprotection (HAI titer ≥1:40) rates were similar between groups (ID vs. IM, H1N1: 91.1% vs. 91.7%, H3N2: 90.7% vs. 91.4%, and B: 87.4% vs. 89.3%). Local injection site reactions overall were more common with ID than IM vaccine (ID vs. IM: 89.2% vs. 60.2%), but were usually grade 1 or 2 and transient. The frequencies of local injection site pain and systemic reactions were similar between vaccine groups, except more myalgia with IM vaccine. CONCLUSIONS: The ID vaccine elicited immune responses comparable to IM vaccine except for the seroconversion rate to B virus. With the exception of pain, local injection site reactions were more common with the ID vaccine, but well-tolerated and of short duration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00772109.

DNA and modified vaccinia virus Ankara vaccines encoding multiple cytotoxic and helper T-lymphocyte epitopes of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) are safe but weakly immunogenic in HIV-1-uninfected, vaccinia virus-naive adults.

We evaluated a DNA plasmid-vectored vaccine and a recombinant modified vaccinia virus Ankara vaccine (MVA-mBN32), each encoding cytotoxic and helper T-lymphocyte epitopes of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial in 36 HIV-1-uninfected adults using a heterologous prime-boost schedule. HIV-1-specific cellular immune responses, measured as interleukin-2 and/or gamma interferon production, were induced in 1 (4%) of 28 subjects after the first MVA-mBN32 immunization and in 3 (12%) of 25 subjects after the second MVA-mBN32 immunization. Among these responders, polyfunctional T-cell responses, including the production of tumor necrosis factor alpha and perforin, were detected. Vaccinia virus-specific antibodies were induced to the MVA vector in 27 (93%) of 29 and 26 (93%) of 28 subjects after the first and second immunizations with MVA-mBN32. These peptide-based vaccines were safe but were ineffective at inducing HIV-1-specific immune responses and induced much weaker responses than MVA vaccines expressing the entire open reading frames of HIV-1 proteins.