Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
País/Região como assunto
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Lancet ; 390(10095): 649-658, 2017 08 12.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28666680

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Microneedle patches provide an alternative to conventional needle-and-syringe immunisation, and potentially offer improved immunogenicity, simplicity, cost-effectiveness, acceptability, and safety. We describe safety, immunogenicity, and acceptability of the first-in-man study on single, dissolvable microneedle patch vaccination against influenza. METHODS: The TIV-MNP 2015 study was a randomised, partly blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 1, clinical trial at Emory University that enrolled non-pregnant, immunocompetent adults from Atlanta, GA, USA, who were aged 18-49 years, naive to the 2014-15 influenza vaccine, and did not have any significant dermatological disorders. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to four groups and received a single dose of inactivated influenza vaccine (fluvirin: 18 µg of haemagglutinin per H1N1 vaccine strain, 17 µg of haemagglutinin per H3N2 vaccine strain, and 15 µg of haemagglutinin per B vaccine strain) (1) by microneedle patch or (2) by intramuscular injection, or received (3) placebo by microneedle patch, all administered by an unmasked health-care worker; or received a single dose of (4) inactivated influenza vaccine by microneedle patch self-administered by study participants. A research pharmacist prepared the randomisation code using a computer-generated randomisation schedule with a block size of 4. Because of the nature of the study, participants were not masked to the type of vaccination method (ie, microneedle patch vs intramuscular injection). Primary safety outcome measures are the incidence of study product-related serious adverse events within 180 days, grade 3 solicited or unsolicited adverse events within 28 days, and solicited injection site and systemic reactogenicity on the day of study product administration through 7 days after administration, and secondary safety outcomes are new-onset chronic illnesses within 180 days and unsolicited adverse events within 28 days, all analysed by intention to treat. Secondary immunogenicity outcomes are antibody titres at day 28 and percentages of seroconversion and seroprotection, all determined by haemagglutination inhibition antibody assay. The trial is completed and registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02438423. FINDINGS: Between June 23, 2015, and Sept 25, 2015, 100 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to a group. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events, no treatment-related unsolicited grade 3 or higher adverse events, and no new-onset chronic illnesses. Among vaccinated groups (vaccine via health-care worker administered microneedle patch or intramuscular injection, or self-administered microneedle patch), overall incidence of solicited adverse events (n=89 vs n=73 vs n=73) and unsolicited adverse events (n=18 vs n=12 vs n=14) were similar. Reactogenicity was mild, transient, and most commonly reported as tenderness (15 [60%] of 25 participants [95% CI 39-79]) and pain (11 [44%] of 25 [24-65]) after intramuscular injection; and as tenderness (33 [66%] of 50 [51-79]), erythema (20 [40%] of 50 [26-55]), and pruritus (41 [82%] of 50 [69-91]) after vaccination by microneedle patch application. The geometric mean titres were similar at day 28 between the microneedle patch administered by a health-care worker versus the intramuscular route for the H1N1 strain (1197 [95% CI 855-1675] vs 997 [703-1415]; p=0·5), the H3N2 strain (287 [192-430] vs 223 [160-312]; p=0·4), and the B strain (126 [86-184] vs 94 [73-122]; p=0·06). Similar geometric mean titres were reported in participants who self-administered the microneedle patch (all p>0·05). The seroconversion percentages were significantly higher at day 28 after microneedle patch vaccination compared with placebo (all p<0·0001) and were similar to intramuscular injection (all p>0·01). INTERPRETATION: Use of dissolvable microneedle patches for influenza vaccination was well tolerated and generated robust antibody responses. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza/administração & dosagem , Adolescente , Adulto , Humanos , Imunogenicidade da Vacina , Vacinas contra Influenza/imunologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Aceitação pelo Paciente de Cuidados de Saúde , Segurança , Soroconversão , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados/administração & dosagem , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados/imunologia , Adulto Jovem
2.
Vaccine ; 38(45): 7175-7181, 2020 10 21.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32792250

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: This study sought to evaluate the acceptability of inactivated influenza vaccine delivered by microneedle patch (MNP) in comparison to inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) delivered by hypodermic needle. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: From the general population of Atlanta, Georgia, we screened 112 and enrolled 100 healthy adult subjects ages 18 to 49 years. Main Outcome(s) and Measure(s). Our participants were randomized to 4 groups of 25 per arm: (1) IIV by MNP administered by healthcare worker (HCW), (2) IIV by MNP self-administered by study participants, (3) IIV by intramuscular (IM) injection administered by HCW or (4) placebo by MNP administered by HCW. We administered four questionnaires: at Day 0 before and after study product delivery, and at Days 8 and 28. RESULTS: At baseline, 98.6% of participants receiving MNP vaccination reported an overall positive experience with MNPs, compared to 86.4% for participants receiving IM vaccination. For future influenza vaccination, study participants (N = 99) preferred MNP (n = 65, 69.9%) to injections or nasal spray (n = 20, 21.5%), and the preference for MNP increased from Day 0 to Day 28. Factor analyses resulted in two scaled measures including MNP Use Perceptions (a = 0.799, n = 5 items) and MNP Perceived Convenience (a = 0.844, n = 4 items) that were included in longitudinal assessments; while findings reflect significant differences across treatment groups on mean scores for ease of use, MNP perceived protection, MNP reliability, and MNP selection knowledge, all groups reported their belief that influenza vaccination by MNP would be reliable and protective, as well as easy-to-use and convenient. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Most participants were accepting of IIV vaccination by MNP and preferred it to injection. Delivery of IIV by MNP may help increase vaccination coverage.


Assuntos
Vacinas contra Influenza , Influenza Humana , Adolescente , Adulto , Georgia , Humanos , Influenza Humana/prevenção & controle , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Vacinação , Vacinas de Produtos Inativados/efeitos adversos , Adulto Jovem
3.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30110896

RESUMO

The purpose of this study is to understand among a convenience sample of 400 adults aged 60 years of age or older (1) reasons for being willing or unwilling to participate in a vaccine clinical research study and (2) overall perceptions about vaccine clinical research. A cross-sectional study using a sample of older adults residing in the metro-Atlanta area and surrounding neighborhoods was conducted. The study questionnaire contained 37 questions, including questions about socio-demographics and perceptions about clinical trial processes. Statistical analysis was conducted using logistic regression. The adjusted modeling results indicated that sex, distance to research clinic, and being informed about the research findings played a role in the likelihood of an elderly person participating in a vaccine study. Males were more likely to participate in clinical trials as compared to females (OR: 2.486; CI: 1.042⁻5.934). Most participants were willing to travel up to 25 miles from the research clinic. Of the respondents, 45% were unlikely to participate if the results of the current trial are not shared. Improving access to clinical trials in terms of distance traveled and ensuring streamlined processes to inform participants about the results of the trial in the future would increase willingness to participate in vaccine clinical trials. The survey could serve as a useful tool for conducting vaccine studies and other clinical trials by understanding the barriers specific to the elderly.


Assuntos
Ensaios Clínicos como Assunto/psicologia , Voluntários Saudáveis/psicologia , Vacinas/administração & dosagem , Fatores Etários , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Estudos Transversais , Feminino , Nível de Saúde , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Fatores Sexuais , Fatores Socioeconômicos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Meios de Transporte
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA