Effect of Non-Rotavirus Enteric Infections on Vaccine Efficacy in a ROTASIIL Clinical Trial.

This study examined the relative proportion of enteric pathogens associated with severe gastroenteritis (GE) among children younger than 2 years in a phase III efficacy trial of the ROTASIIL® vaccine in India, evaluated the impact of co-infections on vaccine efficacy (VE), and characterized the association between specific pathogens and the clinical profile of severe GE. Stored stool samples collected from cases of severe GE in the phase III trial were tested by quantitative polymerase chain reaction using TaqMan™ Array Cards. Etiology was attributed by calculating the adjusted attributable fraction (AF) for each pathogen. A test-negative design was used to estimate VE. The pathogens with the highest AFs for severe diarrhea were rotavirus (23.5%), adenovirus 40/41 (17.0%), Shigella spp./enteroinvasive Escherichia coli, norovirus GII, enterotoxigenic E. coli, and Cryptosporidium spp. A considerable proportion of the disease in these children could not be explained by the pathogens tested. Severe GE cases associated with rotavirus and Shigella spp. were more likely to have a longer duration of vomiting and diarrhea, respectively. Cases attributed to Cryptosporidium spp. were more severe and required hospitalization. In the intention-to-treat population, VE was estimated to be 43.9% before and 46.5% after adjustment for co-infections; in the per-protocol population, VE was 46.7% before and 49.1% after adjustments. Rotavirus continued to be the leading cause of severe GE in this age group. The adjusted VE estimates obtained did not support co-infections as a major cause of lower vaccine performance in low- and middle-income countries.

A Phase 2/3 double blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study in healthy adult participants in Vietnam to examine the safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated whole virion, alum adjuvanted, A(H5N1) influenza vaccine (IVACFLU-A/H5N1).

BACKGROUND: A global shortfall of vaccines for avian influenza A(H5N1) would occur, especially in low- and-middle income countries, if a pandemic were to occur. To address this issue, development of a pre-pandemic influenza vaccine was initiated in 2012, leveraging a recently established influenza vaccine manufacturing capacity in Vietnam. METHODS: This was a Phase 2/3, double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study to test the safety and immunogenicity of IVACFLU-A/H5N1 vaccine in healthy adults. Phase 2 was a dose selection study, in which 300 participants were randomized to one of the three groups (15 mcg, 30 mcg, or placebo). Safety and immunogenicity were assessed in all participants. In Phase 3, 630 participants were randomized to receive the IVACFLU-A/H5N1 vaccine dose selected in Phase 2 (15 mcg, n = 525) or placebo (n = 105). Safety was assessed in all Phase 3 participants and immunogenicity was measured in a subset of participants. RESULTS: The vaccine was well tolerated and most of the adverse events were mild and of short duration. Mild pain at the injection site was the most common adverse event seen in 60 percent of participants in the vaccine group in Phase 3. In Phase 2, both 15 mcg and 30 mcg doses were immunogenic, so the lower dose was selected for further testing in Phase 3. In Phase 3 overall seroconversion rates were 68 percent for hemagglutination inhibition (HI), 51 percent for microneutralization (MN) and 56 percent for single radial hemolysis (SRH). The seroprotection rates were 44 percent for HI, 41 percent for MN and 55 percent for SRH. The GMT ratio was 5.31 and 3.7 for HI and MN respectively; GMA was 4.75 for the SRH. CONCLUSION: The IVACFLU A/H5N1 was safe and immunogenic. Development of this pandemic avian influenza vaccine is a welcome addition to the limited global pool of these vaccines. ClinicalTrials.gov register NCT02612909.

A phase 2/3 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of a seasonal trivalent inactivated split-virion influenza vaccine (IVACFLU-S) in healthy adults in Vietnam.

Background: Under the WHO's Global Action Plan for influenza vaccines, we conducted a phase 2-3 study of IVACFLU-S, a trivalent, seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine candidate.Methods: In the phase 2 portion of the study, 252 participants received one dose of 15 mcg hemagglutinin (HA) vaccine per strain or placebo. Following determination of safety, 636 additional participants were randomized in phase 3 to receive vaccine or placebo. Immunogenicity was assessed in a subset of the participants in the phase 3 study.Results: Higher proportion (70%) of participants in the IVACFLU-S arm reported solicited local adverse events (AEs) (p < .0001) as compared to placebo (25%). Mild injection site pain and tenderness were most common AEs seen in 55% and 60% of participants in the vaccine group. The solicited systemic AEs were comparable (p = .4149). The majority of solicited and unsolicited AEs were mild to moderate in severity. In the vaccine arm for the combined age group of 18-60 years of age, seroconversion against antigens A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B was achieved in 70.3%, 76.1%, and 54.1% of participants respectively; seroprotection against antigens A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B was achieved in 83.3%, 86.6%, and 60.3% of participants respectively; and the geometric mean fold rise for the hemagglutinin-inhibition (HI) antibody titers against antigen A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B were 13.15, 11.85, and 5.87, respectively.Conclusion: This study demonstrates the local reactogenicity, other safety, and immunogenicity of IVACFLU-S, first domestically produced influenza vaccine in Vietnam.ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT03095599 (March 29, 2017).

A randomized Phase III clinical trial to assess the efficacy of a bovine-human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine in Indian infants.

Rotavirus is the most common cause of moderate-to-severe infant diarrhoea in developing countries, resulting in enormous morbidity, mortality, and economic burden. A bovine-human reassortant pentavalent rotavirus vaccine (BRV-PV) targeting the globally most common strains was developed in India and tested in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled end-point driven Phase III efficacy clinical trial implemented at six sites across India. Infants 6 to 8weeks of age were randomized (1:1) to receive three oral doses of BRV-PV or placebo at 6, 10, and 14weeks of age along with routine vaccines. Home visit surveillance was conducted to detect severe rotavirus gastroenteritis (SRVGE) and safety outcomes until the children reached two years of age. A total of 3749 infants received BRV-PV while 3751 received placebo. At the time of the primary end-point (when the minimum number of cases needed for analysis were accrued) the vaccine efficacy against SRVGE was 36% (95% CI 11.7, 53.6, p=0.0067) in the per protocol (PP) analysis, and 41.9% (95% CI 21.1, 57.3, p=0.0005) in the intent to treat (ITT) analysis. Vaccine efficacy over the entire follow-up period (until children reached two years of age) was 39.5% (95% CI 26.7, 50, p<0.0001) in the PP analysis and 38.8% (95% CI, 26.4, 49, p<0.0001) in the ITT analysis. Vaccine efficacy against the very severe rotavirus cases (VSRVGE, Vesikari score≥16) was 60.5% (95% CI 17.7, 81, p=0.0131) at the time of the primary analysis and 54.7% (95% CI 29.7, 70.8, p=0.0004) for the complete follow-period in the PP population. The incidence of solicited, unsolicited, and serious adverse events were similar in both the vaccine and placebo groups. Likewise, the number of intussusceptions and deaths were similar between both groups. Thus, BRV-PV is an effective, well tolerated and safe vaccine in Indian infants. (Trial registration: Clinical Trials.Gov [NCT 02133690] and Clinical Trial Registry of India [CTRI/2013/05/003667]).

Microdosing: concept, application and relevance.

The use of microdose pharmacokinetic studies as an essential tool in drug development is still to catch on. While this approach promises potential cost savings and a quantum leap in efficiencies of the drug development process, major hurdles still need to be overcome before the technique becomes commonplace and part of routine practice. Clear regulations in Europe and the USA have had an enabling effect. The lack of enabling provisions for microdosing studies in Indian regulation, despite low risk and manifest relevance for the local drug development industry, is inconsistent with the country's aspirations to be among the leaders in pharmaceutical research.