Search

The African swine fever virus (ASFV) causes a fatal hemorrhagic disease in domestic swine, and at present no treatment or vaccine is available. Natural and gene-deleted, live attenuated strains protect against closely related virulent strains; however, they are yet to be deployed and evaluated in the field to rule out chronic persistence and a potential for reversion to virulence. Previous studies suggest that antibodies play a role in protection, but induction of cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) could be the key to complete protection. Hence, generation of an efficacious subunit vaccine depends on identification of CTL targets along with a suitable delivery method that will elicit effector CTLs capable of eliminating ASFV-infected host cells and confer long-term protection. To this end, we evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of an adenovirus-vectored ASFV (Ad-ASFV) multiantigen cocktail formulated in two different adjuvants and at two immunizing doses in swine. Immunization with the cocktail rapidly induced unprecedented ASFV antigen-specific antibody and cellular immune responses against all of the antigens. The robust antibody responses underwent rapid isotype switching within 1 week postpriming, steadily increased over a 2-month period, and underwent rapid recall upon boost. Importantly, the primed antibodies strongly recognized the parental ASFV (Georgia 2007/1) by indirect fluorescence antibody (IFA) assay and Western blotting. Significant antigen-specific gamma interferon-positive (IFN-γ + ) responses were detected postpriming and postboosting. Furthermore, this study is the first to demonstrate induction of ASFV antigen-specific CTL responses in commercial swine using Ad-ASFV multiantigens. The relevance of the induced immune responses in regard to protection needs to be evaluated in a challenge study., (Copyright © 2016, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.)

The influenza vaccination is known as the most effective method for preventing influenza infection and its complications in the elderly. Conventional subunit (Agrippal S1; Novartis), MF59-adjuvanted (Fluad; Novartis), and intradermal (IDflu15; Sanofi Pasteur) influenza vaccines are widely used throughout South Korea. However, few comparative studies evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines are available. Prior to the beginning of the 2011-2012 influenza season, 335 healthy elderly volunteers randomly received one of three seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines, the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, or intradermal influenza vaccine. Serum hemagglutination-inhibiting antibody levels were measured at the time of vaccination and at 1 and 6 months after vaccination. Adverse events were recorded prospectively. A total of 113 conventional subunit, 111 MF59-adjuvanted, and 111 intradermal influenza vaccine volunteers were followed up during a 6-month postvaccination period. One month after vaccination, all three vaccines satisfied Committee for Medical Products for Human Use (CHMP) immunogenicity criteria for the A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 strains but not for the B strain. Compared with the subunit vaccine, the intradermal vaccine exhibited noninferiority, while the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superiority. Furthermore, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine was more immunogenic against the A/H3N2 strain than was the subunit vaccine up to 6 months postvaccination. The most common local and systemic reactions to the conventional subunit, MF59-adjuvanted, and intradermal influenza vaccines were pain at the injection site (7.1%, 10.8%, and 6.3%, respectively) and generalized myalgia (0.9%, 8.1%, and 5.4%, respectively). Local and systemic reactions were similar among the three vaccine groups. MF59-adjuvanted vaccine exhibited superior immunogenicity compared with a conventional subunit vaccine and had a comparable safety profile. For older adults, the MF59-adjuvanted vaccine is preferable for providing superior immunogenicity., (Copyright © 2014, American Society for Microbiology. All Rights Reserved.)

Six vaccine formulations containing AS02V or alum (aluminum phosphate [AlPO4]) adjuvant with pneumococcal proteins, pneumococcal histidine triad D (PhtD), and/or detoxified pneumolysin (dPly), either as a polysaccharide carrier in an 8-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (8PCV) or as free (unconjugated) proteins, were evaluated in adults -65 to 85 years of age. In this phase I observer-blind study, 167 healthy subjects were randomized to receive two doses (days 0 and 60) of 10 or 30 μg PhtD-dPly plus AS02V or alum, 8PCV plus AS02V or alum, or one dose (day 0) of 23-valent polysaccharide pneumococcal vaccine (23PPV) as a control (placebo on day 60). The safety, reactogenicity, and antibody-specific responses to these vaccines were evaluated. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. The incidences of solicited local and specific general (fatigue and myalgia) symptoms tended to be higher in the AS02V groups than in other groups. Anti-PhtD and anti-Ply antibody responses were observed in all groups except the control group. One month post-dose 2, the anti-PhtD and anti-Ply antibody geometric mean concentrations tended to be higher with AS02V than with alum, higher with a dose of 30 μg than with 10 μg for PhtD-dPly and higher with 30-μg PhtD-dPly formulations than with conjugated PhtD and dPly (8PCV) formulations. Functional antibody responses, measured by an opsonophagocytic activity assay, tended to be higher with 8PCV than with 23PPV. In conclusion, vaccine formulations containing free or conjugated PhtD and dPly had acceptable reactogenicity and safety profiles in elderly adults. Immune responses were enhanced with an AS02V-adjuvanted formulation containing free 30-μg PhtD-dPly compared to those with alum adjuvant and conjugated proteins. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT00756067.).

We investigated a protein-based nontypeable Haemophilus influenzae (NTHi) and pneumococcal (HiP) vaccine containing pneumococcal histidine triad D (PhtD), detoxified pneumolysin (dPly), and NTHi protein D (PD) in adults. In a phase I study, 40 healthy 18- to 40-year-old subjects were randomized (2:2:1) to receive two HiP doses administered 60 days apart, with or without AS03 adjuvant (HiP-AS and HiP groups, respectively), or Engerix B (GlaxoSmithKline, Belgium) as a control. Safety, antibodies, and antigen-specific CD4(+) T-cell immune responses were assessed before and until 480 days after vaccination. No serious adverse events were reported, and no subject withdrew due to an adverse event. Local and systemic symptoms were reported more frequently in the HiP-AS group than in the other two groups. The frequency and intensity of local and systemic symptoms appeared to increase after the second dose of HiP-AS or HiP but not Engerix B. Antibody geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) for PhtD, dPly, and PD increased after each dose of HiP-AS or HiP, with higher GMCs being observed in the HiP-AS group (statistically significant for anti-PD after dose 1 and anti-Ply after dose 2). GMCs remained higher at day 420 than prior to vaccination in both the HiP-AS and HiP groups. Antigen-specific CD4(+) T cells increased after each dose but were unmeasurable by day 480. Two doses of an investigational PhtD-dPly-PD protein vaccine induced humoral immunity and antigen-specific CD4(+) T-cell responses after each dose, with generally higher responses when the vaccine was administered with AS03. HiP combined with AS03 appeared to be more reactogenic than the antigens alone. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT00814489.).

Enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC) is a primary cause of traveler's diarrhea for which there is no licensed vaccine. This phase 1 trial determined the safety and immunogenicity of a recombinantly produced double mutant heat-labile enterotoxin (dmLT) of ETEC. It was administered as a single oral dose of dmLT in escalating doses of 5 μg, 25 μg, 50 μg, and 100 μg, followed by a 72-h inpatient observation, outpatient visits at 8, 14, and 28 days, and telephone calls at 2 and 6 months postvaccination. Safety was assessed by frequency of adverse events, and immune responses determined after immunization included dmLT-specific serum IgA and IgG, fecal IgA, antibody-secreting cells (ASC), and antibodies in lymphocyte supernatant (ALS) responses. All doses were well tolerated by the 36 healthy adults enrolled. Immune responses were limited in the 5- and 25-μg dose recipients. The 50-μg dose recipients trended toward stronger responses than the 100-μg dose recipients by serum IgA (67% versus 33%, P = 0.22), serum IgG (58% versus 33%, P = 0.41), and fecal IgA (58% versus 33%, P = 0.41). By day 14 postvaccination, there were significantly more positive responders (≥4-fold increase from baseline) among the 50- versus 100-μg dose recipients for serum IgA (P = 0.036) but not serum IgG (P = 0.21). In conclusion, a single oral dose of dmLT was well tolerated and immunogenic, with immune responses plateauing at the 50-μg dose. (This clinical trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov, registration number NCT01147445.).

Influenza virus vaccination is recommended for children, but so far, active vaccination has not been achieved because most parents lack knowledge of vaccine safety and many doctors are reluctant to administer vaccine due to concerns that steroids might alter immunogenicity. The aim of this study was to compare the immunogenicity and safety of inactivated trivalent split influenza virus vaccine between children with recurrent wheezing and healthy children of the same age group. Sixty-eight healthy children and 62 children with recurrent wheezing took part in this study. Seroconversion rates, seroprotection rates, geometric mean titers (GMTs), and geometric mean titer ratios (GMTRs) were measured by a hemagglutination inhibition assay for the assessment of immunogenicity. Solicited and unsolicited local and systemic adverse events were measured for the assessment of safety. Regarding immunogenicity, the seroconversion and seroprotection rates showed no difference overall between healthy children and children with recurrent wheezing. Also, no difference was observed between steroid-treated and nontreated groups with recurrent wheezing. Generally, the GMTs after vaccination were higher in the one-dose vaccination groups for healthy children and children with recurrent wheezing, but the GMTRs revealed different results according to strain in the two groups. Regarding safety, solicited local and systemic adverse events showed no differences between healthy children and children with recurrent wheezing. This study demonstrates that inactivated split influenza virus vaccine is able to induce protective immune responses in healthy children, as observed in previous studies, as well as in children with recurrent wheezing who require frequent steroid treatment.

Since initial reports in April 2009, the pandemic influenza A (H1N1) virus has spread globally. Influenza vaccines are the primary method for the control of influenza and its complications. We conducted a multicenter clinical trial to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of H1N1 vaccine (Green Cross Co.) in young adults (18 to 64 years) and the elderly (≥ 65 years) using a two-dose regimen, with the doses administered 21 days apart. Three different regimens of hemagglutinin antigen were comparatively analyzed: 3.75 μg (MF59 adjuvanted) versus 7.5 μg (MF59 adjuvanted) versus 15 μg (nonadjuvanted) in young adults and 3.75 μg (MF59 adjuvanted) versus 7.5 μg (MF59 adjuvanted) in the elderly. In young adults, all three vaccine regimens met the European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products (EMA) criteria after the first dose. In the elderly, on day 21 after the first dose, the rates of seroprotection and seroconversion were significantly higher for the 7.5-μg dose of MF59 adjuvanted vaccine than for the 3.75-μg dose (58.0% versus 44.3% [P = 0.03] and 53.7% versus 37.2% [P < 0.01], respectively). After the second dose, the geometric mean titer (GMT) increment was blunted with a 15-μg dose of nonadjuvanted vaccine, whereas the GMT increased about 2-fold with MF59 adjuvanted vaccines. In conclusion, a single 7.5-μg dose of MF59 adjuvanted vaccine would have a practical advantage over a two-dose, 3.75-μg, MF59 adjuvanted vaccine priming schedule. Following a two-dose priming schedule, the increase in hemagglutinin inhibition titers was higher with MF59 adjuvanted vaccine than with nonadjuvanted vaccine.

We evaluated the immunogenicity, safety, and antibody persistence of a Vero cell rabies vaccine manufactured in China, compared with those of Verorab. Adequate titers of antibody were observed for the two vaccines. ChengDa rabies vaccine could be a promising alternative vaccine for many developing countries which cannot afford expensive rabies vaccines.

The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare both the safety and tolerability and the humoral and cell-mediated immune responses for two influenza virus subunit vaccines, one with MF59 adjuvant (Fluad) and one without an adjuvant (Agrippal), in healthy and in human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1)-infected adult individuals. To achieve this aim, an open, randomized, comparative clinical trial was performed during the 2005-2006 season. A total of 256 subjects were enrolled to receive one dose of vaccine intramuscularly. Blood samples were taken at the time of vaccination and at 1 and 3 months postvaccination. A good humoral antibody response was detected for both vaccines, meeting all the criteria of the Committee for Medical Products for Human Use. After Beyer's correction for prevaccination status, Fluad exhibited better immunogenicity than Agrippal, as shown from the analysis of the geometric mean titers, with significant differences for some virus strains; however, no definitive conclusions on the clinical significance of such results can be drawn, because the method used to estimate antibody response is currently nonstandard for influenza virus vaccines. Significant induction of an antigen-specific CD4+ T-lymphocyte proliferative response was detected at all time points after immunization, for both the vaccines, among HIV-1-seronegative subjects. This was different from what was observed for HIV-1-infected individuals. In this group, significance was not reached at 30 days postvaccination (T30) for those immunized with Agrippal. Also when data were compared between treatment groups, a clear difference in the response at T30 was observed in favor of Fluad (P = 0.0002). The safety profiles of both vaccines were excellent. For HIV-1-infected individuals, no significant changes either in viremia or in the CD4+ cell count were observed at any time point. The results showed good safety and immunogenicity for both vaccines under study for both uninfected and HIV-1-infected adults, confirming current recommendations for immunization of this high-risk category.