Effect of Varying Doses of a Monovalent H7N9 Influenza Vaccine With and Without AS03 and MF59 Adjuvants on Immune Response: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Human infections with the avian influenza A(H7N9) virus were first reported in China in 2013 and continue to occur. Hemagglutinin H7 administered alone is a poor immunogen necessitating evaluation of adjuvanted H7N9 vaccines. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of an inactivated H7N9 vaccine with and without AS03 adjuvant, as well as mixed vaccine schedules that included sequential administration of AS03- and MF59-containing formulations and of adjuvanted and unadjuvanted formulations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Double-blind, phase 2 trial at 5 US sites enrolled 980 adults aged 19 through 64 years from September 2013 through November 2013; safety follow-up was completed in January 2015. INTERVENTIONS: The H7N9 vaccine was given on days 0 and 21 at nominal doses of 3.75 µg, 7.5 µg, 15 µg, and 45 µg of hemagglutinin with or without AS03 or MF59 adjuvant mixed on site. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportions achieving a hemagglutination inhibition antibody (HIA) titer of 40 or higher at 21 days after the second vaccination; vaccine-related serious adverse events through 12 months after the first vaccination; and solicited signs and symptoms after vaccination through day 7. RESULTS: Two doses of vaccine were required to induce detectable antibody titers in most participants. After 2 doses of an H7N9 formulation containing 15 µg of hemagglutinin given without adjuvant, with AS03 adjuvant, or with MF59 adjuvant, the proportion achieving an HIA titer of 40 or higher was 2% (95% CI, 0%-7%) without adjuvant (n = 94), 84% (95% CI, 76%-91%) with AS03 adjuvant (n = 96), and 57% (95% CI, 47%-68%) with MF59 adjuvant (n = 92) (P < .001 for comparison of the AS03 and MF59 schedules). The 2 schedules alternating AS03-and MF59-adjuvanted formulations led to lower geometric mean titers (GMTs) of (41.5 [95% CI, 31.7-54.4]; n = 92) and (58.6 [95% CI, 44.3-77.6]; n = 96) than the group induced by 2 AS03-adjuvanted formulations (n = 96) (103.4 [95% CI, 78.7-135.9]; P < .001) but higher GMTs than 2 doses of MF59-adjuvanted formulation (n = 94) (29.0 [95% CI, 22.4-37.6]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The AS03 and MF59 adjuvants augmented the immune responses to 2 doses of an inactivated H7N9 influenza vaccine, with AS03-adjuvanted formulations inducing the highest titers. This study of 2 adjuvants used in influenza vaccine formulations with adjuvant mixed on site provides immunogenicity information that may be informative to influenza pandemic preparedness programs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01942265.

AS03-adjuvanted versus non-adjuvanted inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine against seasonal influenza in elderly people: a phase 3 randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to compare AS03-adjuvanted inactivated trivalent influenza vaccine (TIV) with non-adjuvanted TIV for seasonal influenza prevention in elderly people. METHODS: We did a randomised trial in 15 countries worldwide during the 2008-09 (year 1) and 2009-10 (year 2) influenza seasons. Eligible participants aged at least 65 years who were not in hospital or bedridden and were without acute illness were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either AS03-adjuvanted TIV or non-adjuvanted TIV. Randomisation was done in an internet-based system, with a blocking scheme and stratification by age (65-74 years and 75 years or older). Participants were scheduled to receive one vaccine in each year, and remained in the same group in years 1 and 2. Unmasked personnel prepared and gave the vaccines, but participants and individuals assessing any study endpoint were masked. The coprimary objectives were to assess the relative efficacy of the vaccines and lot-to-lot consistency of the AS03-adjuvanted TIV (to be reported elsewhere). For the first objective, the primary endpoint was relative efficacy of the vaccines for prevention of influenza A (excluding A H1N1 pdm09) or B, or both, that was confirmed by PCR analysis in year 1 (lower limit of two-sided 95% CI had to be greater than zero to establish superiority). From Nov 15, to April 30, in both years, participants were monitored by telephone or site contact and home visits every week or 2 weeks to identify cases of influenza-like illness. After onset of suspected cases, we obtained nasal and throat swabs to identify influenza RNA with real-time PCR. Efficacy analyses were done per protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00753272. FINDINGS: We enrolled 43 802 participants, of whom 21 893 were assigned to and received the AS03-adjuvanted TIV and 21 802 the non-adjuvanted TIV in year 1. In the year 1 efficacy cohort, fewer participants given AS03-adjuvanted than non-adjuvanted TIV were infected with influenza A or B, or both (274 [1·27%, 95% CI 1·12-1·43] of 21 573 vs 310 [1·44%, 1·29-1·61] of 21 482; relative efficacy 12·11%, 95% CI -3·40 to 25·29; superiority not established). Fewer participants in the year 1 efficacy cohort given AS03-adjuvanted TIV than non-adjuvanted TIV were infected with influenza A (224 [1·04%, 95% CI 0·91-1·18] vs 270 [1·26, 1·11-1·41]; relative efficacy 17·53%, 95% CI 1·55-30·92) and influenza A H3N2 (170 [0·79, 0·67-0·92] vs 205 [0·95, 0·83-1·09]; post-hoc analysis relative efficacy 22·0%, 95% CI 5·68-35·49). INTERPRETATION: AS03-adjuvanted TIV has a higher efficacy for prevention of some subtypes of influenza than does a non-adjuvanted TIV. Future influenza vaccine studies in elderly people should be based on subtype or lineage-specific endpoints. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA.

High-dose recombinant Canarypox vaccine expressing HIV-1 protein, in seronegative human subjects.

BACKGROUND: In clinical trials, canarypox ALVAC-human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) vaccines have been shown to elicit human HIV-specific cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) responses in some but not all healthy uninfected adults.Methods. A clinical trial was conducted to examine whether the vaccine vCP1452 would elicit a greater HIV-specific CTL response when given at a dose of 10(8.0) TCID50 (60 participants) than when given at the regular dose, 10(7.26) TCID50 (40 participants); as a control, a placebo vaccine preparation also was administered (10 participants). RESULTS: Two weeks after the last vaccination in a series, HIV-specific CTL responses were not significantly different when measured by either chromium-release assay (8% and 16% in the high- and regular-dose recipients, respectively) or interferon- gamma ELISpot assay (8% and 15% in the high- and regular-dose recipients, respectively); moreover, recipients of the higher dose had greater local and systemic reactions (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: High reactogenicity associated with an increased dose of vCP1452 negates the need for further evaluation of this strategy to boost the frequency of HIV-specific CTL response in seronegative human subjects. Development of highly immunogenic canarypox vectors requires further work to optimize vector and insert design, as well as novel ways to increase dosage and to reduce reactogenicity.