Immunogenicity and safety of two quadrivalent influenza vaccines in healthy adult and elderly participants in India - A phase III, active-controlled, randomized clinical study.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to compare the immunogenicity and safety profile of two quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIVs) in healthy adults (18-60 years) and elderly (>61 years) participants. METHOD: This phase III study was conducted from March 2018 to April 2018 across 12 sites in India. In this randomized, observer-blind, active-controlled study, 480 participants were randomized to receive a single dose of test vaccine (subunit, inactivated influenza vaccine; Influvac® Tetra, Abbott) (n = 240) or reference vaccine (split virion, inactivated influenza vaccine; VaxiFlu-4, Zydus Cadilla Healthcare) (n = 240). The primary objective was to describe and compare the immunogenicity of each vaccination group based on hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay seroprotection and seroconversion rates, and geometric mean fold increase (GMFI) against four vaccine strains in two age groups. Safety and reactogenicity were also compared for the vaccines in both the age groups. RESULTS: The pre- and post-vaccination HI titers for both the vaccines were comparable. The GMFI varied from 4.3 - 22.7 in the test and 3.7-21.6 in the reference vaccine group. The seroprotection rates were >90% for the A-strains and ranged between >43% and <60% for B-strains for both the vaccines. Seroconversion rates varied between 41.4% and 78.8%. Overall, the reported adverse events (AEs) for both the vaccines were <1% and comparable. Reported local and systemic reactions were comparable. CONCLUSION: Influvac® Tetra elicited an adequate immune response with a favorable safety profile which was comparable with the reference vaccine. (Clinical trial registry number: CTRI/2018/02/012222).

A Randomized Trial of Mycobacterium w in Severe Presumed Gram-Negative Sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Mycobacterium w (Mw), an immunomodulator, has been shown to resolve early organ failure in severe sepsis. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does Mw improve survival in patients with severe presumed gram-negative sepsis? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study conducted in ICUs of five tertiary care centers in India. We included consecutive patients (age ≥ 18 years) with presumed gram-negative sepsis in the study within 48 h of the first organ dysfunction. Patients in the treatment arm received 0.3 mL/d of Mw intradermally for 3 consecutive days, whereas the control arm received matching placebo. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. The secondary outcomes were ventilator-free days, days receiving vasopressor therapy, ICU and hospital length of stay, nosocomial infection rate, antibiotic use duration, and delta Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. RESULTS: We included 202 patients with severe sepsis (101 Mw, 101 placebo). The use of Mw significantly reduced the mortality (9/101 vs 20/101; estimate difference, 0.11 [95% CI, 0.01-0.21]; P = .04). We found no difference in ventilator-free days, days receiving vasopressor drugs, ICU length of stay, and the hospital length of stay. The time to mortality (median, 13 days vs 8.5 days) was significantly longer in the Mw than in the placebo arm. The delta SOFA score, rate of nosocomial infections, and antibiotic use duration were similar in the two arms. We found Mw to reduce significantly the odds (OR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.15-0.9]) of mortality after adjusting for culture-positive sepsis, baseline SOFA score, age, and sex. INTERPRETATION: The use of Mw was associated with a significant reduction in mortality in patients with severe presumed gram-negative sepsis. Further studies are required to confirm our findings. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02330432; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.