Immunogenicity and Safety of a Purified Vero Rabies Vaccine-Serum Free, Compared With 2 Licensed Vaccines, in a Simulated Rabies Post-Exposure Regimen in Healthy Adults in France: A Randomized, Controlled, Phase 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: A next-generation Vero cell rabies vaccine (PVRV-NG2) was developed using the same Pitman-Moore strain as in the licensed purified Vero cell vaccine (PVRV; Verorab) and the human diploid cell vaccine (HDCV; Imovax Rabies®). METHODS: This dual-center, modified, double-blind, phase 3 study evaluated the immunogenic non-inferiority and safety of PVRV-NG2 with and without concomitant intramuscular human rabies immunoglobulin (HRIG) versus PVRV + HRIG and HDCV + HRIG in a simulated post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) regimen. Healthy adults ≥18 years old (N = 640) were randomized 3:1:1:1 to PVRV-NG2 + HRIG, PVRV + HRIG, HDCV + HRIG, or PVRV-NG2 alone (administered as single vaccine injections on days [D] 0, D3, D7, D14, and 28, with HRIG on D0 in applicable groups). Rabies virus neutralizing antibodies (RVNA) titers were assessed pre- (D0) and post-vaccination (D14, D28, and D42) using the rapid fluorescent focus inhibition test. Non-inferiority, based on the proportion of participants achieving RVNA titers ≥0.5 IU/mL (primary objective), was demonstrated if the lower limit of the 95% CI of the difference in proportions between PVRV-NG2 + HRIG and PVRV + HRIG/HDCV + HRIG was >-5% at D28. Safety was assessed up to 6 months after the last injection. RESULTS: Non-inferiority of PVRV-NG2 + HRIG compared with PVRV + HRIG and HDCV + HRIG was demonstrated. Nearly all participants (99.6%, PVRV-NG2 + HRIG; 100%, PVRV + HRIG; 98.7%, HDCV + HRIG; 100%, PVRV-NG2 alone) achieved RVNA titers ≥0.5 IU/mL at D28. Geometric mean titers were similar between groups with concomitant HRIG administration at all time points. Safety profiles were similar between PVRV-NG2 and comparator vaccines. CONCLUSIONS: In a simulated PEP setting, PVRV-NG2 + HRIG showed comparable immunogenicity and safety to current standard-of-care vaccines. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03965962.

Harmonizing the collection of solicited adverse events in prophylactic vaccine clinical trials.

INTRODUCTION: During the clinical development of a vaccine, study participants are monitored for the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) over a defined period post-vaccination to assess the safety of prophylactic vaccines. Among the safety data collected, a standard practice in prophylactic vaccine clinical trials involves collecting reactogenicity data through daily AE solicitation of pre-defined sets of symptoms (i.e. solicited AEs). AREAS COVERED: This paper aims to propose recommendations to improve and harmonize the collection of active AE solicitation in prophylactic vaccine clinical trials. EXPERT OPINION: We recommend using limited lists of solicited AEs adapted to the vaccine technology and target population. While the US Food and Drug Administration toxicity grading scale is commonly used in adolescents/adults, harmonizing grading criteria in infants/children would facilitate the comparison of vaccines' safety profiles. Solicited systemic AEs should not systematically be considered causally related to vaccination. Collection of solicited AEs should occur in cohorts of a maximum of 1,000 vaccinated participants, as larger cohort sizes do not improve substantially the precision of AE incidence. The incidence of daily solicited AEs should be compared with a control group for improved interpretations of their clinical relevance. These suggestions would improve the characterization of safety profiles of vaccines.