First-in-human safety and immunogenicity investigations of three adjuvanted reduced dose inactivated poliovirus vaccines (IPV-Al SSI) compared to full dose IPV Vaccine SSI when given as a booster vaccination to adolescents with a history of IPV vaccination at 3, 5, 12months and 5years of age.

BACKGROUND: There is a demand of affordable IPV in the World. Statens Serum Institut (SSI) has developed three reduced dose IPV formulations adsorbed to aluminium hydroxide; 1/3 IPV-Al, 1/5 IPV-Al and 1/10 IPV-Al SSI, and now report the results of the first investigations in humans. METHODS: 240 Danish adolescents, aged 10-15years, and childhood vaccinated with IPV were booster vaccinated with 1/3 IPV-Al, 1/5 IPV-Al, 1/10 IPV-Al or IPV Vaccine SSI. The booster effects (GMTRs) of the three IPV-Al SSI were compared to IPV Vaccine SSI, and evaluated for non-inferiority. IMMUNOGENICITY RESULTS: The pre-vaccination GMTs were similar across the groups; 926 (type 1), 969 (type 2) and 846 (type 3) in the total trial population. The GMTRs by poliovirus type and IPV formulation were: Type 1: 17.0 (1/3 IPV-Al), 13.0 (1/5 IPV-Al), 7.1 (1/10 IPV-Al) and 42.2 (IPV Vaccine SSI). Type 2: 12.5 (1/3 IPV-Al), 13.1 (1/5 IPV-Al), 7.6 (1/10 IPV-Al) and 47.8 (IPV Vaccine SSI). Type 3: 14.5 (1/3 IPV-Al), 16.2 (1/5 IPV-Al), 8.9 (1/10 IPV-Al) and 62.4 (IPV Vaccine SSI) Thus, the three IPV-Al formulations were highly immunogenic, but inferior to IPV Vaccine SSI, in this booster vaccination trial. SAFETY RESULTS: No SAE and no AE of severe intensity occurred. 59.2% of the subjects reported at least one AE. Injection site pain was the most frequent AE in all groups; from 24.6% to 43.3%. Injection site redness and swelling frequencies were<5% in most and<10% in all groups. The most frequent systemic AEs were fatigue (from 8.2% to 15.0%) and headache (from 15.0% to 28.3%). Most AEs were of mild intensity. In conclusion, the three IPV-Al SSI were safe in adolescents and the booster effects were satisfactory. ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT02280447.

Sensitivity of C-Tb: a novel RD-1-specific skin test for the diagnosis of tuberculosis infection.

C-Tb, a novel Mycobacterium tuberculosis and 6-kDa early secretory antigenic target/10-kDa culture filtrate protein (ESAT-6/CFP-10)-specific skin test, has high specificity in bacille Calmette-Guerin-vaccinated healthy controls. However, the sensitivity of C-Tb has hitherto not been determined. The objective was to determine the sensitivity of C-Tb in patients with active tuberculosis (TB) in comparison with the tuberculin skin test (TST) and QuantiFERON-TB Gold In-Tube (QFT-GIT).C-Tb and TST were randomly administered in a double-blinded fashion to one or the other forearm in 253 patients with active TB with or without HIV co-infection. QFT-GIT testing was performed prior to skin testing.Using a receiver operating characteristic curve-derived cut-point of 5 mm, C-Tb sensitivity was similar to QFT-GIT (73.9 (95% CI 67.8-79.3) versus 75.1 (95% CI 69.3-80.2)), and similar in HIV-infected and HIV-uninfected patients (76.7 (95% CI 69.0-83.3) versus 69.5 (95% CI 59.2-78.5)). However, sensitivity was significantly diminished in HIV-infected patients with CD4 counts <100 cells·mm(-3). C-Tb and QFT-GIT combined had significantly higher sensitivity than C-Tb alone (p<0.0001). C-Tb was safe with no significant adverse events. The 5 mm cut-point corresponded to that found in the previously published specificity study (TESEC-04).C-Tb has similar sensitivity compared with QFT-GIT for the diagnosis of M. tuberculosis infection. Sensitivity was reduced only in HIV-infected patients with severe immunosuppression. Further studies in different settings are required to validate the proposed 5 mm cut-point.

Randomised clinical trial investigating the specificity of a novel skin test (C-Tb) for diagnosis of M. tuberculosis infection.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculin skin testing is simple and relatively inexpensive, but the specificity of PPD is affected by BCG vaccination. OBJECTIVE: Determine optimal dose and specificity of recombinant ESAT-6 and CFP-10 (C-Tb) produced in Lactococcus lactis for diagnosis of M. tuberculosis infection. METHODS: In a dose finding phase I trial 0.01 or 0.1 µg preserved and unpreserved C-Tb was injected by Mantoux technique in 38 patients with active tuberculosis and induration responses measured. In a phase II specificity trial in 151 uninfected, BCG vaccinated participants 0.1 µg C-Tb was compared to 2 TU PPD. RESULTS: 0.1 µg C-Tb gave a median induration of 15 mm after 2 days. Phenol preservation did not affect the response. The specificity of C-Tb was 99.3% (95% CI 96-100%) regarding indurations ≥5 mm as a positive outcome. This was higher than the specificity of PPD (63% using a cut-off of 5 mm or 92% using a cut-off of 15 mm to adjust for non-specific BCG responses). Local adverse reactions following C-Tb injection included transient itching and discomfort as expected components of the immune response. CONCLUSION: C-Tb offers a simple and convenient skin test to diagnose M. tuberculosis infection using a single, universal cut-off unaffected by BCG vaccination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01033929 and NCT01241188.

First-in-man open clinical trial of a combined rdESAT-6 and rCFP-10 tuberculosis specific skin test reagent.

BACKGROUND: Tuberculin is still the only available skin test reagent for the diagnosis of mycobacterial infection. The product has a remarkable sensitivity, but poor specificity. Previous studies, including two human phase I clinical trials, have indicated that rdESAT-6 has a potential as an improved skin test reagent. Animal studies have shown that the sensitivity may be increased by inclusion of the genetically related CFP-10 antigen in the preparation without loosing specificity. METHODOLOGY: In this study a Lactococcus fermented, recombinant skin test reagent consisting of a 1ratio1 wt/wt of rdESAT-6 and CFP-10 was manufactured according to GMP standards and tested for the first time in 42 healthy adult volunteers. The two doses of 0.01 microg or 0.1 microg were injected intradermally by the Mantoux technique with 6 or 12 weeks interval. No serious adverse events and only mild adverse reactions were reported. The reagent elicited a positive skin test reaction after the first injection in one participant, who most likely was latently infected with M. tuberculosis as indicated by an appreciable IFN gamma response just below the Quantiferon(R) cut-off level at the screening visit. None of the remaining participants in the four groups had any skin test reactions and sensitisation by the reagent could therefore be excluded. CONCLUSION: The investigational skin test reagent rdESAT-6 and CFP-10 appeared safe and non-sensitising in this first-in-man clinical trial in human volunteers and can now be tested in larger clinical trials involving individuals with latent M. tuberculosis infection or active TB disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00793702.

Risk of sensitization in healthy adults following repeated administration of rdESAT-6 skin test reagent by the Mantoux injection technique.

Limited specificity of the tuberculin skin test incited the development of the intradermal Mycobacterium tuberculosis-specific rdESAT-6 skin test. Animal studies have shown, however, that there is a possible risk of sensitization when repeated injections of rdESAT-6 are given. The aim of this phase 1 open clinical trial was to assess the sensitization risk and safety of repeated administration of rdESAT-6 reagent in 31 healthy adult volunteers. Three groups of volunteers received two fixed doses of 0.1 microg rdESAT-6 28, 56 or 112 days apart, respectively. After the second injection, the diameter of induration and/or redness at the injection site was measured and taken as a possible sensitization reaction if >5mm. In vitro interferon gamma (IFN-gamma) responses were measured as supportive evidence. Local adverse reactions at the injection site and adverse events were recorded. One out of 31 (3%) volunteers showed a positive skin reaction (sensitization) upon a second injection of rdESAT-6 after 28days and an increased IFN-gamma response to ESAT-6. For 7 (23%) of the volunteers, local adverse reactions related to the product were registered, but all reactions were mild and predictable. In conclusion, repeated injections of the rdESAT-6 skin test reagent are safe, and sensitization occurs at a low rate, especially if the time span between succeeding doses is wide.