Safety and immunogenicity of two formulations of rotavirus vaccine in Vietnamese infants.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: ROTAVIN-M1® (licensed, frozen vaccine) and ROTAVIN (second-generation, liquid candidate vaccine) are two rotavirus vaccine formulations developed from a live attenuated G1P8 (KH0118) strain by Center for Research and Production of Vaccines and Biologicals (POLYVAC), Vietnam. This study compared the safety and immunogenicity of these two formulations. METHODS: A Phase 3, randomized, partially double-blinded, active-controlled study was conducted in healthy infants aged 60-91 days in Vietnam. Infants received two doses of ROTAVIN or ROTAVIN-M1 in a ratio of 2:1 with an interval of 8 weeks. Solicited reactions were collected for 7 days after each vaccination. Blood samples were collected pre-vaccination and 4 weeks after the second vaccination in a subset of infants. Non-inferiority criteria required that the lower bound of 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the post-vaccination anti-rotavirus IgA GMC (Geometric Mean Concentration) ratio of ROTAVIN/ROTAVIN-M1 should be >0.5. A co-primary objective was to compare the safety of the two vaccines in terms of solicited reactions. RESULTS: A total of 825 infants were enrolled. The post-vaccination GMC was 48.25 (95% CI: 40.59, 57.37) in the ROTAVIN group and 35.04 (95% CI: 27.34, 44.91) in the ROTAVIN-M1 group with an IgA GMC ratio of 1.38 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.86) thus meeting the pre-set criteria for non-inferiority. A total of 605 solicited reactions were reported in 297 (36.0%) participants with 35.4% in the ROTAVIN group and 37.2% in the ROTAVIN-M1 group. There were no cases of intussusception or death reported in the study. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the data generated, it can be concluded that ROTAVIN is immunologically non-inferior and has similar safety profile to ROTAVIN-M1 when administered to infants in a two-dose schedule. Therefore, it can be considered as a more suitable option for programmatic use to prevent rotavirus diarrhoea in Vietnam and the Mekong region. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03703336, October 11, 2018.

Immunogenicity and safety of two monovalent rotavirus vaccines, ROTAVAC® and ROTAVAC 5D® in Zambian infants.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: ROTAVAC® (frozen formulation stored at -20 °C) and ROTAVAC 5D® (liquid formulation stable at 2-8 °C) are rotavirus vaccines derived from the 116E human neonatal rotavirus strain, developed and licensed in India. This study evaluated and compared the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines in an infant population in Zambia. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2b, open-label, randomized, controlled trial wherein 450 infants 6 to 8 weeks of age were randomized equally to receive three doses of ROTAVAC or ROTAVAC 5D, or two doses of ROTARIX®. Study vaccines were administered concomitantly with routine immunizations. Blood samples were collected pre-vaccination and 28 days after the last dose. Serum anti-rotavirus IgA antibodies were measured by ELISA, with WC3 and 89-12 rotavirus strains as viral lysates in the assays. The primary analysis was to assess non-inferiority of ROTAVAC 5D to ROTAVAC in terms of the geometric mean concentration (GMC) of serum IgA (WC3) antibodies. Seroresponse and seropositivity were also determined. Safety was evaluated as occurrence of immediate, solicited, unsolicited, and serious adverse events after each dose. RESULTS: The study evaluated 388 infants in the per-protocol population. All three vaccines were well tolerated and immunogenic. The post-vaccination GMCs were 14.0 U/mL (95% CI: 10.4, 18.8) and 18.1 U/mL (95% CI: 13.7, 24.0) for the ROTAVAC and ROTAVAC 5D groups, respectively, yielding a ratio of 1.3 (95% CI: 0.9, 1.9), thus meeting the pre-set non-inferiority criteria. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events were similar across all study arms. No death or intussusception case was reported during study period. CONCLUSIONS: Among Zambian infants, both ROTAVAC and ROTAVAC 5D were well tolerated and the immunogenicity of ROTAVAC 5D was non-inferior to that of ROTAVAC. These results are consistent with those observed in licensure trials in India and support use of these vaccines across wider geographical areas.