Safety, Immunogenicity, and Regimen Selection of Ad26.RSV.preF-Based Vaccine Combinations: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 1/2a Study.

BACKGROUND: Ad26.RSV.preF is an adenovirus serotype 26 vector-based respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine encoding a prefusion conformation-stabilized RSV fusion protein (preF) that demonstrated robust humoral and cellular immunogenicity and showed promising efficacy in a human challenge study in younger adults. Addition of recombinant RSV preF protein might enhance RSV-specific humoral immune responses, especially in older populations. METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2a study compared the safety and immunogenicity of Ad26.RSV.preF alone and varying doses of Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein combinations in adults aged ≥60 years. This report includes data from cohort 1 (initial safety, n = 64) and cohort 2 (regimen selection, n = 288). Primary immunogenicity and safety analyses were performed 28 days postvaccination (cohort 2) for regimen selection. RESULTS: All vaccine regimens were well tolerated, with similar reactogenicity profiles among them. Combination regimens induced greater humoral immune responses (virus-neutralizing and preF-specific binding antibodies) and similar cellular ones (RSV-F-specific T cells) as compared with Ad26.RSV.preF alone. Vaccine-induced immune responses remained above baseline up to 1.5 years postvaccination. CONCLUSIONS: All Ad26.RSV.preF-based regimens were well tolerated. A combination regimen comprising Ad26.RSV.preF, which elicits strong humoral and cellular responses, and RSV preF protein, which increases humoral responses, was selected for further development. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03502707.

Concomitant Administration of Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF Protein Vaccine and High-dose Influenza Vaccine in Adults 65 Years and Older: a Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Since influenza and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) carry significant burden in older adults with overlapping seasonality, vaccines for both pathogens would ideally be coadministered in this population. Here we evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of concomitant administration of Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein and high-dose seasonal influenza vaccine (Fluzone-HD®) in adults ≥65 years old. METHODS: Participants were randomized 1:1 to the Coadministration or Control group. The Coadministration group received concomitant Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein and Fluzone-HD® on Day 1 and placebo on Day 29, while the Control group received Fluzone-HD® and placebo at Day 1 and Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein on Day 29. Influenza hemagglutination-inhibiting and RSV preF-binding antibody titers were measured postvaccination and tested for noninferiority between both groups. Safety data were collected throughout the study and analyzed descriptively. RESULTS: Coadministered Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein and Fluzone-HD® vaccines induced noninferior immune responses compared to each vaccine administered alone. Seroconversion and seroprotection rates against influenza were similar between groups. Both vaccines remained well tolerated upon concomitant administration. CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein and Fluzone-HD® showed an acceptable safety profile and did not hamper the immunogenicity of either vaccine, thus supporting that both vaccines can be concomitantly administered in adults ≥65 years old.

Vaccine-induced antibody Fc-effector functions in humans immunized with a combination Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein vaccine.

IMPORTANCE: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) can cause serious illness in older adults (i.e., those aged ≥60 years). Because options for RSV prophylaxis and treatment are limited, the prevention of RSV-mediated illness in older adults remains an important unmet medical need. Data from prior studies suggest that Fc-effector functions are important for protection against RSV infection. In this work, we show that the investigational Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein vaccine induced Fc-effector functional immune responses in adults aged ≥60 years who were enrolled in a phase 1/2a regimen selection study of Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein. These results demonstrate the breadth of the immune responses induced by the Ad26.RSV.preF/RSV preF protein vaccine.

Persistence of immunological memory as a potential correlate of long-term, vaccine-induced protection against Ebola virus disease in humans.

Introduction: In the absence of clinical efficacy data, vaccine protective effect can be extrapolated from animals to humans, using an immunological biomarker in humans that correlates with protection in animals, in a statistical approach called immunobridging. Such an immunobridging approach was previously used to infer the likely protective effect of the heterologous two-dose Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen. However, this immunobridging model does not provide information on how the persistence of the vaccine-induced immune response relates to durability of protection in humans. Methods and results: In both humans and non-human primates, vaccine-induced circulating antibody levels appear to be very stable after an initial phase of contraction and are maintained for at least 3.8 years in humans (and at least 1.3 years in non-human primates). Immunological memory was also maintained over this period, as shown by the kinetics and magnitude of the anamnestic response following re-exposure to the Ebola virus glycoprotein antigen via booster vaccination with Ad26.ZEBOV in humans. In non-human primates, immunological memory was also formed as shown by an anamnestic response after high-dose, intramuscular injection with Ebola virus, but was not sufficient for protection against Ebola virus disease at later timepoints due to a decline in circulating antibodies and the fast kinetics of disease in the non-human primates model. Booster vaccination within three days of subsequent Ebola virus challenge in non-human primates resulted in protection from Ebola virus disease, i.e. before the anamnestic response was fully developed. Discussion: Humans infected with Ebola virus may benefit from the anamnestic response to prevent disease progression, as the incubation time is longer and progression of Ebola virus disease is slower as compared to non-human primates. Therefore, the persistence of vaccine-induced immune memory could be considered as a potential correlate of long-term protection against Ebola virus disease in humans, without the need for a booster.

Evaluation of symptoms in respiratory syncytial virus infection in adults: psychometric evaluation of the Respiratory Infection Intensity and Impact Questionnaire™ symptom scores.

BACKGROUND: The Respiratory Infection Intensity and Impact Questionnaire (RiiQ™) is a patient-reported outcome measure designed to assess symptoms and impacts of respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection. This study evaluated the construct validity, reliability, and responsiveness of the RiiQ™ Respiratory and Systemic Symptoms Scale scores. METHODS: Prospective data were analyzed from a total of 1795 participants, including from non-hospitalized patients with acute respiratory infection (ARI) and no coinfections enrolled in a Phase 2b RSV vaccine study (RSV-positive: n = 60; RSV-negative: n = 1615), and two observational studies of patients hospitalized with RSV (n = 20; n = 100). Descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), test-retest intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), construct validity correlations (between a clinician-assessed clinical questionnaire and the RiiQ™ symptoms scale), known-groups validity, and responsiveness (correlations of change scores) were evaluated. RESULTS: Mean patient age ranged from 66.5 to 71.5 years and the majority of patients were female. Initial assessments in the vaccine trial (ARI Day 1) were suggestive of less severe illness than in the observational studies with hospitalized patients. CFA loadings (> 0.40) supported summary scores. ICCs exceeding the recommended threshold of 0.70 supported test-retest reliability for Respiratory and Systemic Symptoms, except in the small observational study. At the scale level, correlations were moderate to strong (|r| ≥ 0.3) and positive between the Respiratory Symptoms Scale and the related clinical questionnaire scores, reflecting measurement of similar symptoms in support of convergent validity. Correlations with change in Patient Global Impression of Severity > 0.30 supported responsiveness. CONCLUSIONS: Psychometric tests applied to the RiiQ™ Symptoms scales provide evidence of its reliability, construct validity, discriminating ability, and responsiveness for use in clinical studies to assess the onset and severity of RSV symptoms.

RSV A2-Based Prefusion F Vaccine Candidates Induce RSV A and RSV B Cross Binding and Neutralizing Antibodies and Provide Protection against RSV A and RSV B Challenge in Preclinical Models.

RSV is divided into two antigenic subtypes, RSV A and RSV B, which is largely based on the variation in the G protein, while the fusion protein F is more conserved and a target for antibody-mediated neutralization. Here we evaluate the breadth of the protective immune responses across RSV A and RSV B subtypes, induced by vaccines based on the RSV A-based fusion protein, stabilized in the prefusion conformation (preF) in preclinical models. Immunization of naïve cotton rats with preF subunit or preF encoded by a replication incompetent Adenoviral 26, induced antibodies capable of neutralizing recent RSV A and RSV B clinical isolates, as well as protective efficacy against a challenge with RSV A and RSV B strains. Similarly, induction of cross-neutralizing antibodies was observed after immunization with Ad26-encoded preF, preF protein or a mix of both (Ad26/preF protein) in RSV pre-exposed mice and African Green Monkeys. Transfer of serum of human subjects immunized with Ad26/preF protein into cotton rats provide protection against challenges with both RSV A and RSV B, with complete protection against both strains observed in the lower respiratory tract. In contrast, almost no protection against RSV A and B infection was observed after the transfer of a human serum pool isolated pre-vaccination. These results collectively show that the RSV A-based monovalent Ad26/preF protein vaccine induced neutralizing antibodies, as well as protection against both RSV A and RSV B subtypes in animals, including by passive transfer of human antibodies alone, suggesting that clinical efficacy against both subtypes can be achieved.

Combination Ad26.RSV.preF/preF protein vaccine induces superior protective immunity compared with individual vaccine components in preclinical models.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of severe respiratory disease for which no licensed vaccine is available. We have previously shown that a prefusion (preF) conformation-stabilized RSV F protein antigen and an adenoviral vector encoding RSV preF protein (Ad26.RSV.preF) are immunogenic and protective in animals when administered as single components. Here, we evaluated a combination of the 2 components, administered as a single injection. Strong induction of both humoral and cellular responses was shown in RSV-naïve and pre-exposed mice and pre-exposed African green monkeys (AGMs). Both components of the combination vaccine contributed to humoral immune responses, while the Ad26.RSV.preF component was the main contributor to cellular immune responses in both mice and AGMs. Immunization with the combination elicited superior protection against RSV A2 challenge in cotton rats. These results demonstrate the advantage of a combination vaccine and support further clinical development.

Efficacy and Safety of an Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF Protein Vaccine in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) can cause serious lower respiratory tract disease in older adults, but no licensed RSV vaccine currently exists. An adenovirus serotype 26 RSV vector encoding a prefusion F (preF) protein (Ad26.RSV.preF) in combination with RSV preF protein was previously shown to elicit humoral and cellular immunogenicity. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b, proof-of-concept trial to evaluate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of an Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein vaccine. Adults who were 65 years of age or older were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive vaccine or placebo. The primary end point was the first occurrence of RSV-mediated lower respiratory tract disease that met one of three case definitions: three or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection (definition 1), two or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection (definition 2), and either two or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection or one or more symptoms of lower respiratory tract infection plus at least one systemic symptom (definition 3). RESULTS: Overall, 5782 participants were enrolled and received an injection. RSV-mediated lower respiratory tract disease meeting case definitions 1, 2, and 3 occurred in 6, 10, and 13 vaccine recipients and in 30, 40, and 43 placebo recipients, respectively. Vaccine efficacy was 80.0% (94.2% confidence interval [CI], 52.2 to 92.9), 75.0% (94.2% CI, 50.1 to 88.5), and 69.8% (94.2% CI, 43.7 to 84.7) for case definitions 1, 2, and 3, respectively. After vaccination, RSV A2 neutralizing antibody titers increased by a factor of 12.1 from baseline to day 15, a finding consistent with other immunogenicity measures. Percentages of participants with solicited local and systemic adverse events were higher in the vaccine group than in the placebo group (local, 37.9% vs. 8.4%; systemic, 41.4% vs. 16.4%); most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity. The frequency of serious adverse events was similar in the vaccine group and the placebo group (4.6% and 4.7%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: In adults 65 years of age or older, Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein vaccine was immunogenic and prevented RSV-mediated lower respiratory tract disease. (Funded by Janssen Vaccines and Prevention; CYPRESS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03982199.).

Antibody effector functions are associated with protection from respiratory syncytial virus.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) infection is a major cause of severe lower respiratory tract infection and death in young infants and the elderly. With no effective prophylactic treatment available, current vaccine candidates aim to elicit neutralizing antibodies. However, binding and neutralization have poorly predicted protection in the past, and accumulating data across epidemiologic cohorts and animal models collectively point to a role for additional antibody Fc-effector functions. To begin to define the humoral correlates of immunity against RSV, here we profiled an adenovirus 26 RSV-preF vaccine-induced humoral immune response in a group of healthy adults that were ultimately challenged with RSV. Protection from infection was linked to opsonophagocytic functions, driven by IgA and differentially glycosylated RSV-specific IgG profiles, marking a functional humoral immune signature of protection against RSV. Furthermore, Fc-modified monoclonal antibodies able to selectively recruit effector functions demonstrated significant antiviral control in a murine model of RSV.

Non-human primate to human immunobridging demonstrates a protective effect of Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA-BN-Filo vaccine against Ebola.

Without clinical efficacy data, vaccine protective effect may be extrapolated from animals to humans using an immunologic marker that correlates with protection in animals. This immunobridging approach was used for the two-dose Ebola vaccine regimen Ad26.ZEBOV, MVA-BN-Filo. Ebola virus (EBOV) glycoprotein binding antibody data obtained from 764 vaccinated healthy adults in five clinical studies (NCT02416453, NCT02564523, NCT02509494, NCT02543567, NCT02543268) were used to calculate mean predicted survival probability (with preplanned 95% confidence interval [CI]). We used a logistic regression model based on EBOV glycoprotein binding antibody responses in vaccinated non-human primates (NHPs) and NHP survival after EBOV challenge. While the protective effect of the vaccine regimen in humans can be inferred in this fashion, the extrapolated survival probability cannot be directly translated into vaccine efficacy. The primary immunobridging analysis evaluated the lower limit of the CI against predefined success criterion of 20% and passed with mean predicted survival probability of 53.4% (95% CI: 36.7-67.4).

Burden of respiratory syncytial virus infection in older and high-risk adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the evidence from developed countries.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) significantly impacts the health of older and high-risk adults (those with comorbidities). We aimed to synthesise the evidence on RSV disease burden and RSV-related healthcare utilisation in both populations. METHODS: We searched Embase and MEDLINE for papers published between 2000 and 2019 reporting the burden and clinical presentation of symptomatic RSV infection and the associated healthcare utilisation in developed countries in adults aged ≥60 years or at high risk. We calculated pooled estimates using random-effects inverse variance-weighted meta-analysis. RESULTS: 103 out of 3429 articles met the inclusion criteria. Among older adults, RSV caused 4.66% (95% CI 3.34-6.48%) of symptomatic respiratory infections in annual studies and 7.80% (95% CI 5.77-10.45%) in seasonal studies; RSV-related case fatality proportion (CFP) was 8.18% (95% CI 5.54-11.94%). Among high-risk adults, RSV caused 7.03% (95% CI 5.18-9.48%) of symptomatic respiratory infections in annual studies, and 7.69% (95% CI 6.23-9.46%) in seasonal studies; CFP was 9.88% (95% CI 6.66-14.43%). Data paucity impaired the calculation of estimates on population incidence, clinical presentation, severe outcomes and healthcare-related utilisation. CONCLUSIONS: Older and high-risk adults frequently experience symptomatic RSV infection, with appreciable mortality; however, detailed data are lacking. Increased surveillance and research are needed to quantify population-based disease burden and facilitate RSV treatments and vaccine development.

First-in-human study to evaluate safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of heterologous regimens using the multivalent filovirus vaccines Ad26.Filo and MVA-BN-Filo administered in different sequences and schedules: A randomized, controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Though clinically similar, Ebola virus disease and Marburg virus disease are caused by different viruses. Of the 30 documented outbreaks of these diseases in sub-Saharan Africa, eight were major outbreaks (≥200 cases; five caused by Zaire ebolavirus [EBOV], two by Sudan ebolavirus [SUDV], and one by Marburg virus [MARV]). Our purpose is to develop a multivalent vaccine regimen protecting against each of these filoviruses. This first-in-human study assessed the safety and immunogenicity of several multivalent two-dose vaccine regimens that contain Ad26.Filo and MVA-BN-Filo. METHODS: Ad26.Filo combines three vaccines encoding the glycoprotein (GP) of EBOV, SUDV, and MARV. MVA-BN-Filo is a multivalent vector encoding EBOV, SUDV, and MARV GPs, and Taï Forest nucleoprotein. This Phase 1, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study enrolled healthy adults (18-50 years) into four groups, randomized 5:1 (active:placebo), to assess different Ad26.Filo and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine directionality and administration intervals. The primary endpoint was safety; immune responses against EBOV, SUDV, and MARV GPs were also assessed. RESULTS: Seventy-two participants were randomized, and 60 (83.3%) completed the study. All regimens were well tolerated with no deaths or vaccine-related serious adverse events (AEs). The most frequently reported solicited local AE was injection site pain/tenderness. Solicited systemic AEs most frequently reported were headache, fatigue, chills, and myalgia; most solicited AEs were Grade 1-2. Solicited/unsolicited AE profiles were similar between regimens. Twenty-one days post-dose 2, 100% of participants on active regimen responded to vaccination and exhibited binding antibodies against EBOV, SUDV, and MARV GPs; neutralizing antibody responses were robust against EBOV (85.7-100%), but lower against SUDV (35.7-100%) and MARV (0-57.1%) GPs. An Ad26.Filo booster induced a rapid further increase in humoral responses. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that heterologous two-dose vaccine regimens with Ad26.Filo and MVA-BN-Filo are well tolerated and immunogenic in healthy adults. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT02860650.

Phase 1/2a Safety and Immunogenicity of an Adenovirus 26 Vector Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) Vaccine Encoding Prefusion F in Adults 18-50 Years and RSV-Seropositive Children 12-24 Months.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) remains a leading cause of pediatric morbidity, with no approved vaccine. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the Ad26.RSV.preF vaccine candidate in adults and children. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, phase 1/2a, placebo-controlled study, 12 adults (18-50 years) and 36 RSV-seropositive children (12-24 months) were randomized 2:1 to Ad26.RSV.preF (1 × 1011 viral particles [vp] for adults, 5 × 1010 vp for children) or placebo, at day 1 and 29, with 6-month immunogenicity and 1-year safety follow-up. Respiratory syncytial virus infection was an exploratory outcome in children. RESULTS: In adults, solicited adverse events (AEs) were generally mild to moderate, with no serious AEs. In children, no vaccination-related serious AEs were reported; fever was reported in 14 (58.3%) Ad26.RSV.preF recipients. Baseline pediatric geometric mean titers for RSV A2 neutralization increased from 121 (95% confidence interval [CI], 76-191) to 1608 (95% CI, 730-3544) at day 29, and 2235 (95% CI, 1586-3150) at day 57, remaining elevated over 7 months. Respiratory syncytial virus infection was confirmed in fewer children receiving Ad26.RSV.preF (1, 4.2%) than placebo (5, 41.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Ad26.RSV.preF demonstrated immunogenicity in healthy adults and toddlers, with no safety concerns raised. Evaluations in RSV-seronegative children are underway.

Protection against Marburg Virus and Sudan Virus in NHP by an Adenovector-Based Trivalent Vaccine Regimen Is Correlated to Humoral Immune Response Levels.

The Marburg virus (MARV) and Sudan virus (SUDV) belong to the filovirus family. The sporadic human outbreaks occur mostly in Africa and are characterized by an aggressive disease course with high mortality. The first case of Marburg virus disease in Guinea in 2021, together with the increased frequency of outbreaks of Ebola virus (EBOV), which is also a filovirus, accelerated the interest in potential prophylactic vaccine solutions against multiple filoviruses. We previously tested a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen (Ad26.Filo, MVA-BN-Filo) in non-human primates (NHP) and showed a fully protective immune response against both SUDV and MARV in addition to the already-reported protective effect against EBOV. The vaccine-induced glycoprotein (GP)-binding antibody levels appear to be good predictors of the NHP challenge outcome as indicated by the correlation between antibody levels and survival outcome as well as the high discriminatory capacity of the logistic model. Moreover, the elicited GP-specific binding antibody response against EBOV, SUDV, and MARV remains stable for more than 1 year. Overall, the NHP data indicate that the Ad26.Filo, MVA-BN-Filo regimen may be a good candidate for a prophylactic vaccination strategy in regions at high risk of filovirus outbreaks.

Immunogenicity and protective efficacy of adenoviral and subunit RSV vaccines based on stabilized prefusion F protein in pre-clinical models.

Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) remains a leading cause of severe respiratory disease for which no licensed vaccine is available. We have previously described the derivation of an RSV Fusion protein (F) stabilized in its prefusion conformation (preF) as vaccine immunogen and demonstrated superior immunogenicity in naive mice of preF versus wild type RSV F protein, both as protein and when expressed from an Ad26 vaccine vector. Here we address the question if there are qualitative differences between the two vaccine platforms for induction of protective immunity. In naïve mice, both Ad26.RSV.preF and preF protein induced humoral responses, whereas cellular responses were only elicited by Ad26.RSV.preF. In RSV pre-exposed mice, a single dose of either vaccine induced cellular responses and strong humoral responses. Ad26-induced RSV-specific cellular immune responses were detected systemically and locally in the lungs. Both vaccines showed protective efficacy in the cotton rat model, but Ad26.RSV.preF conferred protection at lower virus neutralizing titers in comparison to RSV preF protein. Factors that may contribute to the protective capacity of Ad26.RSV.preF elicited immunity are the induced IgG2a antibodies that are able to engage Fcγ receptors mediating Antibody Dependent Cellular Cytotoxicity (ADCC), and the induction of systemic and lung resident RSV specific CD8 + T cells. These data demonstrate qualitative improvement of immune responses elicited by an adenoviral vector based vaccine encoding the RSV preF antigen compared to the subunit vaccine in small animal models which may inform RSV vaccine development.

Safety and Immunogenicity of Heterologous and Homologous 2-Dose Regimens of Adenovirus Serotype 26- and Modified Vaccinia Ankara-Vectored Ebola Vaccines: A Randomized, Controlled Phase 1 Study.

BACKGROUND: This phase 1 placebo-controlled study assessed the safety and immunogenicity of 2-dose regimens of Ad26.ZEBOV (adenovirus serotype 26 [Ad26]) and MVA-BN-Filo (modified vaccinia Ankara [MVA]) vaccines with booster vaccination at day 360. METHODS: Healthy US adults (N = 164) randomized into 10 groups received saline placebo or standard or high doses of Ad26 or MVA in 2-dose regimens at 7-, 14-, 28-, or 56-day intervals; 8 groups received booster Ad26 or MVA vaccinations on day 360. Participants reported solicited and unsolicited reactogenicity; we measured immunoglobulin G binding, neutralizing antibodies and cellular immune responses to Ebola virus glycoprotein. RESULTS: All regimens were well tolerated with no serious vaccine-related adverse events. Heterologous (Ad26,MVA [dose 1, dose 2] or MVA,Ad26) and homologous (Ad26,Ad26) regimens induced humoral and cellular immune responses 21 days after dose 2; responses were higher after heterologous regimens. Booster vaccination elicited anamnestic responses in all participants. CONCLUSIONS: Both heterologous and homologous Ad26,MVA Ebola vaccine regimens are well tolerated in healthy adults, regardless of interval or dose level. Heterologous 2-dose Ad26,MVA regimens containing an Ebola virus insert induce strong, durable humoral and cellular immune responses. Immunological memory was rapidly recalled by booster vaccination, suggesting that Ad26 booster doses could be considered for individuals at risk of Ebola infection, who previously received the 2-dose regimen.

Prevention of Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infection in Healthy Adults by a Single Immunization of Ad26.RSV.preF in a Human Challenge Study.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a significant cause of severe lower respiratory tract disease in children and older adults, but has no approved vaccine. This study assessed the potential of Ad26.RSV.preF to protect against RSV infection and disease in an RSV human challenge model. METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, healthy adults aged 18-50 years were randomized 1:1 to receive 1 × 1011 vp Ad26.RSV.preF or placebo intramuscularly. Twenty-eight days postimmunization, volunteers were challenged intranasally with RSV-A (Memphis 37b). Assessments included viral load (VL), RSV infections, clinical symptom score (CSS), safety, and immunogenicity. RESULTS: Postchallenge, VL, RSV infections, and disease severity were lower in Ad26.RSV.preF (n = 27) vs placebo (n = 26) recipients: median VL area under the curve (AUC) quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction: 0.0 vs 236.0 (P = .012; predefined primary endpoint); median VL-AUC quantitative culture: 0.0 vs 109; RSV infections 11 (40.7%) vs 17 (65.4%); median RSV AUC-CSS 35 vs 167, respectively. From baseline to 28 days postimmunization, geometric mean fold increases in RSV A2 neutralizing antibody titers of 5.8 and 0.9 were observed in Ad26.RSV.preF and placebo, respectively. Ad26.RSV.preF was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Ad26.RSV.preF demonstrated protection from RSV infection through immunization in a human challenge model, and therefore could potentially protect against natural RSV infection and disease. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03334695; CR108398, 2017-003194-33 (EudraCT); VAC18193RSV2002.

Safety and immunogenicity of the two-dose heterologous Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen in children in Sierra Leone: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Children account for a substantial proportion of cases and deaths from Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vector-based vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from the Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in a paediatric population in Sierra Leone. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, controlled trial was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. Healthy children and adolescents aged 1-17 years were enrolled in three age cohorts (12-17 years, 4-11 years, and 1-3 years) and randomly assigned (3:1), via computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight), to receive an intramuscular injection of either Ad26.ZEBOV (5 × 1010 viral particles; first dose) followed by MVA-BN-Filo (1 × 108 infectious units; second dose) on day 57 (Ebola vaccine group), or a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo (second dose) on day 57 (control group). Study team personnel (except for those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation), participants, and their parents or guardians were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was safety, measured as the occurrence of solicited local and systemic adverse symptoms during 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited systemic adverse events during 28 days after each vaccination, abnormal laboratory results during the study period, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events throughout the study period. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity (humoral immune response), measured as the concentration of Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibodies at 21 days after the second dose. The primary outcome was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine and had available reactogenicity data, and immunogenicity was assessed in all participants who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. FINDINGS: From April 4, 2017, to July 5, 2018, 576 eligible children or adolescents (192 in each of the three age cohorts) were enrolled and randomly assigned. The most common solicited local adverse event during the 7 days after the first and second dose was injection-site pain in all age groups, with frequencies ranging from 0% (none of 48) of children aged 1-3 years after placebo injection to 21% (30 of 144) of children aged 4-11 years after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination. The most frequently observed solicited systemic adverse event during the 7 days was headache in the 12-17 years and 4-11 years age cohorts after the first and second dose, and pyrexia in the 1-3 years age cohort after the first and second dose. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first and second dose vaccinations was malaria in all age cohorts, irrespective of the vaccine types. Following vaccination with MenACWY, severe thrombocytopaenia was observed in one participant aged 3 years. No other clinically significant laboratory abnormalities were observed in other study participants, and no serious adverse events related to the Ebola vaccine regimen were reported. There were no treatment-related deaths. Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second dose of the Ebola virus vaccine regimen were observed in 131 (98%) of 134 children aged 12-17 years (9929 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 8172-12 064]), in 119 (99%) of 120 aged 4-11 years (10 212 EU/mL [8419-12 388]), and in 118 (98%) of 121 aged 1-3 years (22 568 EU/mL [18 426-27 642]). INTERPRETATION: The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen was well tolerated with no safety concerns in children aged 1-17 years, and induced robust humoral immune responses, suggesting suitability of this regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in children. FUNDING: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking and Janssen Vaccines & Prevention BV.

Safety and long-term immunogenicity of the two-dose heterologous Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen in adults in Sierra Leone: a combined open-label, non-randomised stage 1, and a randomised, double-blind, controlled stage 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The Ebola epidemics in west Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo highlight an urgent need for safe and effective vaccines to prevent Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and long-term immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vector-based vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in Sierra Leone, a country previously affected by Ebola. METHODS: The trial comprised two stages: an open-label, non-randomised stage 1, and a randomised, double-blind, controlled stage 2. The study was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. In stage 1, healthy adults (aged ≥18 years) residing in or near Kambia district, received an intramuscular injection of Ad26.ZEBOV (5 × 1010 viral particles) on day 1 (first dose) followed by an intramuscular injection of MVA-BN-Filo (1 × 108 infectious units) on day 57 (second dose). An Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination was offered at 2 years after the first dose to stage 1 participants. The eligibility criteria for adult participants in stage 2 were consistent with stage 1 eligibility criteria. Stage 2 participants were randomly assigned (3:1), by computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive web-response system, to receive either the Ebola vaccine regimen (Ad26.ZEBOV followed by MVA-BN-Filo) or an intramuscular injection of a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo on day 57 (second dose; control group). Study team personnel, except those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation, and participants were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was the safety of the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen, which was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine. Safety was assessed as solicited local and systemic adverse events occurring in the first 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited adverse events occurring in the first 28 days after each vaccination, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events occurring up to each participant's last study visit. Secondary outcomes were to assess Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second vaccine in a per-protocol set of participants (ie, those who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response) and to assess the safety and tolerability of the Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination in stage 1 participants who had received the booster dose. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. FINDINGS: Between Sept 30, 2015, and Oct 19, 2016, 443 participants (43 in stage 1 and 400 in stage 2) were enrolled; 341 participants assigned to receive the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo regimen and 102 participants assigned to receive the MenACWY and placebo regimen received at least one dose of study vaccine. Both regimens were well tolerated with no safety concerns. In stage 1, solicited local adverse events (mostly mild or moderate injection-site pain) were reported in 12 (28%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in six (14%) participants after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited local adverse events were reported in 51 (17%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 58 (24%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 17 (17%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in eight (9%) of 86 after placebo injection. In stage 1, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 18 (42%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in 17 (40%) after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 161 (54%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 107 (43%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 51 (50%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in 39 (45%) of 86 after placebo injection. Solicited systemic adverse events in both stage 1 and 2 participants included mostly mild or moderate headache, myalgia, fatigue, and arthralgia. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first dose was headache in stage 1 and malaria in stage 2. Malaria was the most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the second dose in both stage 1 and 2. No serious adverse event was considered related to the study vaccine, and no immediate reportable events were observed. In stage 1, the safety profile after the booster vaccination was not notably different to that observed after the first dose. Vaccine-induced humoral immune responses were observed in 41 (98%) of 42 stage 1 participants (geometric mean binding antibody concentration 4784 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 3736-6125]) and in 176 (98%) of 179 stage 2 participants (3810 EU/mL [3312-4383]) at 21 days after the second vaccination. INTERPRETATION: The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen was well tolerated and immunogenic, with persistent humoral immune responses. These data support the use of this vaccine regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in adults. FUNDING: Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking and Janssen Vaccines & Prevention BV.

Safety and Immunogenicity of the Ad26.RSV.preF Investigational Vaccine Coadministered With an Influenza Vaccine in Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza cause significant disease burden in older adults. Overlapping RSV and influenza seasonality presents the opportunity to coadminister vaccines for both infections. This study assessed coadministration of the investigational vaccine, Ad26.RSV.preF, an adenovirus serotype 26 (Ad26) vector encoding RSV F protein stabilized in its prefusion conformation (pre-F), with a seasonal influenza vaccine in older adults. METHODS: In this phase 2a, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 180 adults aged ≥60 years received Ad26.RSV.preF plus Fluarix on day 1 and placebo on day 29, or placebo plus Fluarix on day 1 and Ad26.RSV.preF on day 29 (control). RESULTS: The coadministration regimen had an acceptable tolerability profile. Reactogenicity was generally higher after Ad26.RSV.preF versus Fluarix, but symptoms were generally transient and mild or moderate. At 28 days after the first vaccination, the upper confidence intervals of the hemagglutination inhibition antibody geometric mean ratio (control/coadministration) for all influenza strains were <2, demonstrating noninferiority. Robust neutralizing and binding antibody responses to RSV A2 were observed in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of Fluarix with Ad26.RSV.preF vaccine had an acceptable safety profile and showed no evidence of interference in immune response. The results are compatible with simultaneous seasonal vaccination with both vaccines. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03339713.