Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Vaccine ; 38(21): 3780-3789, 2020 05 06.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32273184

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Inmunización Secundaria , Inmunogenicidad Vacunal , Poliomielitis/prevención & control , Vacuna Antipolio de Virus Inactivados/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Antivirales , Femenino , Humanos , Esquemas de Inmunización , Lactante , Masculino , Panamá , Vacuna Antipolio de Virus Inactivados/efectos adversos , Vacunación
2.
Vaccine ; 38(3): 530-538, 2020 01 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31703934

RESUMEN

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.


Asunto(s)
Hidróxido de Aluminio/administración & dosificación , Inmunogenicidad Vacunal , Poliomielitis/epidemiología , Poliomielitis/prevención & control , Vacuna Antipolio de Virus Inactivados/administración & dosificación , Hidróxido de Aluminio/efectos adversos , Hidróxido de Aluminio/inmunología , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunogenicidad Vacunal/efectos de los fármacos , Inmunogenicidad Vacunal/inmunología , Lactante , Masculino , Filipinas/epidemiología , Poliomielitis/inmunología , Vacuna Antipolio de Virus Inactivados/efectos adversos , Vacuna Antipolio de Virus Inactivados/inmunología , Método Simple Ciego
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA