Search

Background: An effective HIV vaccine will most likely need to have potent immunogenicity and broad cross-subtype coverage. The aim of the HIV Vaccine Trials Network (HVTN) 124 was to evaluate safety and immunogenicity of a unique polyvalent DNA-protein HIV vaccine with matching envelope (Env) immunogens., Methods: HVTN 124 was a randomised, phase 1, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, including participants who were HIV seronegative and aged 18-50 years at low risk for infection. The DNA vaccine comprised five plasmids: four copies expressing Env gp120 (clades A, B, C, and AE) and one gag p55 (clade C). The protein vaccine included four DNA vaccine-matched GLA-SE-adjuvanted recombinant gp120 proteins. Participants were enrolled across six clinical sites in the USA and were randomly assigned to placebo or one of two vaccine groups (ie, prime-boost or coadministration) in a 5:1 ratio in part A and a 7:1 ratio in part B. Vaccines were delivered via intramuscular needle injection. The primary outcomes were safety and tolerability, assessed via frequency, severity, and attributability of local and systemic reactogenicity and adverse events, laboratory safety measures, and early discontinuations. Part A evaluated safety. Part B evaluated safety and immunogenicity of two regimens: DNA prime (administered at months 0, 1, and 3) with protein boost (months 6 and 8), and DNA-protein coadministration (months 0, 1, 3, 6, and 8). All randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose were included in the safety analysis. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03409276) and is closed to new participants., Findings: Between April 19, 2018 and Feb 13, 2019, 60 participants (12 in part A [five men and seven women] and 48 in part B [21 men and 27 women]) were enrolled. All 60 participants received at least one dose, and 14 did not complete follow-up (six of 21 in the prime-boost group and eight of 21 in the coadminstration group). 11 clinical adverse events deemed by investigators as study-related occurred in seven of 48 participants in part B (eight of 21 in the prime-boost group and three of 21 in the coadministration group). Local reactogenicity in the vaccine groups was common, but the frequency and severity of reactogenicity signs or symptoms did not differ between the prime-boost and coadministration groups (eg, 20 [95%] of 21 in the prime-boost group vs 21 [100%] of 21 in the coadministration group had either local pain or tenderness of any severity [p=1·00], and seven [33%] vs nine [43%] had either erythema or induration [p=0·97]), nor did laboratory safety measures. There were no delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions or vasculitis or any severe clinical adverse events related to vaccination. The most frequently reported systemic reactogenicity symptoms in the active vaccine groups were malaise or fatigue (five [50%] of ten in part A and 17 [81%] of 21 in the prime-boost group vs 15 [71%] of 21 in the coadministration group in part B), headache (five [50%] and 18 [86%] vs 12 [57%]), and myalgia (four [40%] and 13 [62%] vs ten [48%]), mostly of mild or moderate severity., Interpretation: Both vaccine regimens were safe, warranting evaluation in larger trials., Funding: US National Institutes of Health and US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests IF, NG, KES, JRH, SE, SCDR, DEM, DCM, GDT, LC, and SL report support for the present manuscript from National Institutes of Health (NIH), National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), Division of AIDS, and the HIV Vaccine Trials Network (HVTN) paid to their institutions. SCDR and DEM report support for the present manuscript from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and grants or contracts outside of the submitted work from Janssen, Sanofi, and Moderna. IF reports grants or contracts outside of the submitted work from Janssen, Gilead, Moderna, Pfizer, and Sanofi paid to his institution, consulting fees from Gilead and ViiV, and participation or payment from Janssen for participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board. JRH reports support for attending meetings or travel from the HVTN. MCK reports grants or contracts from NIAID outside of the submitted work and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for the Worcester HIV Vaccine. SL reports royalties or licences from Cosmic Bliss Sciences related to polyvalent DNA–protein HIV vaccine IP from the University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester, MA, USA, and reports stock ownership of Cosmic Bliss Sciences since 2023. All other authors declare no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: HVTN 100 evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of an HIV subtype C pox-protein vaccine regimen, investigating a 12-month booster to extend vaccine-induced immune responses., Methods and Findings: A phase 1-2 randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial enrolled 252 participants (210 vaccine/42 placebo; median age 23 years; 43% female) between 9 February 2015 and 26 May 2015. Vaccine recipients received ALVAC-HIV (vCP2438) alone at months 0 and 1 and with bivalent subtype C gp120/MF59 at months 3, 6, and 12. Antibody (IgG, IgG3 binding, and neutralizing) and CD4+ T-cell (expressing interferon-gamma, interleukin-2, and CD40 ligand) responses were evaluated at month 6.5 for all participants and at months 12, 12.5, and 18 for a randomly selected subset. The primary analysis compared IgG binding antibody (bAb) responses and CD4+ T-cell responses to 3 vaccine-matched antigens at peak (month 6.5 versus 12.5) and durability (month 12 versus 18) timepoints; IgG responses to CaseA2&#95;gp70&#95;V1V2.B, a primary correlate of risk in RV144, were also compared at these same timepoints. Secondary and exploratory analyses compared IgG3 bAb responses, IgG bAb breadth scores, neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses, antibody-dependent cellular phagocytosis, CD4+ polyfunctionality responses, and CD4+ memory sub-population responses at the same timepoints. Vaccines were generally safe and well tolerated. During the study, there were 2 deaths (both in the vaccine group and both unrelated to study products). Ten participants became HIV-infected during the trial, 7% (3/42) of placebo recipients and 3% (7/210) of vaccine recipients. All 8 serious adverse events were unrelated to study products. Less waning of immune responses was seen after the fifth vaccination than after the fourth, with higher antibody and cellular response rates at month 18 than at month 12: IgG bAb response rates to 1086.C V1V2, 21.0% versus 9.7% (difference = 11.3%, 95% CI = 0.6%-22.0%, P = 0.039), and ZM96.C V1V2, 21.0% versus 6.5% (difference = 14.5%, 95% CI = 4.1%-24.9%, P = 0.004). IgG bAb response rates to all 4 primary V1V2 antigens were higher 2 weeks after the fifth vaccination than 2 weeks after the fourth vaccination: 87.7% versus 75.4% (difference = 12.3%, 95% CI = 1.7%-22.9%, P = 0.022) for 1086.C V1V2, 86.0% versus 63.2% (difference = 22.8%, 95% CI = 9.1%-36.5%, P = 0.001) for TV1c8.2.C V1V2, 67.7% versus 44.6% (difference = 23.1%, 95% CI = 10.4%-35.7%, P < 0.001) for ZM96.C V1V2, and 81.5% versus 60.0% (difference = 21.5%, 95% CI = 7.6%-35.5%, P = 0.002) for CaseA2&#95;gp70&#95;V1V2.B. IgG bAb response rates to the 3 primary vaccine-matched gp120 antigens were all above 90% at both peak timepoints, with no significant differences seen, except a higher response rate to ZM96.C gp120 at month 18 versus month 12: 64.5% versus 1.6% (difference = 62.9%, 95% CI = 49.3%-76.5%, P < 0.001). CD4+ T-cell response rates were higher at month 18 than month 12 for all 3 primary vaccine-matched antigens: 47.3% versus 29.1% (difference = 18.2%, 95% CI = 2.9%-33.4%, P = 0.021) for 1086.C, 61.8% versus 38.2% (difference = 23.6%, 95% CI = 9.5%-37.8%, P = 0.001) for TV1.C, and 63.6% versus 41.8% (difference = 21.8%, 95% CI = 5.1%-38.5%, P = 0.007) for ZM96.C, with no significant differences seen at the peak timepoints. Limitations were that higher doses of gp120 were not evaluated, this study was not designed to investigate HIV prevention efficacy, and the clinical significance of the observed immunological effects is uncertain., Conclusions: In this study, a 12-month booster of subtype C pox-protein vaccines restored immune responses, and slowed response decay compared to the 6-month vaccination., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02404311. South African National Clinical Trials Registry (SANCTR number: DOH--27-0215-4796)., Competing Interests: I have read the journal's policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: CAD is a full-time employee at Sanofi Pasteur, shareholder Sanofi. SP is a full-time employee and shareholder at Sanofi Pasteur at the time of the study, now full-time employee at GSK group companies. MK is a full-time employee of GSK group companies, having GSK shares and stock options. OVDM is a full-time employee of GSK group companies, having GSK shares. MA, MNP, VLM are full-time employee of NIH/NIAID, which is the clinical trial sponsor. ZM is a a paid statistical advisor for PLOS Medicine.

In the RV144 trial, vaccine-induced V1V2 IgG correlated with decreased HIV-1 risk. We investigated circulating antibody specificities in two phase 1 poxvirus prime-protein boost clinical trials conducted in South Africa: HVTN 097 (subtype B/E) and HVTN 100 (subtype C). With cross-subtype peptide microarrays and multiplex binding assays, we probed the magnitude and breadth of circulating antibody responses to linear variable loop 2 (V2) and conformational V1V2 specificities. Antibodies targeting the linear V2 epitope, a correlate of decreased HIV-1 risk in RV144, were elicited up to 100% and 61% in HVTN 097 and HVTN 100, respectively. Despite higher magnitude of envelope-specific responses in HVTN 100 compared to HVTN 097 (p's < 0.001), the magnitude and positivity for V2 linear epitope and V1V2 proteins were significantly lower in HVTN 100 compared to HVTN 097. Meanwhile, responses to other major linear epitopes including the variable 3 (V3) and constant 5 (C5) epitopes were higher in HVTN 100 compared to HVTN 097. Our data reveal substantial differences in the circulating antibody specificities induced by vaccination in these two canarypox prime-protein boost trials. Our findings suggest that the choice of viral sequences in prime-boost vaccine regimens, and potentially adjuvants and immunogen dose, influence the elicitation of V2-specific antibodies.

Background: Modest efficacy was reported for the HIV vaccine tested in the RV144 trial, which comprised a canarypox vector (ALVAC) and envelope (env) glycoprotein (gp120). These vaccine components were adapted to express HIV-1 antigens from strains circulating in South Africa, and the adjuvant was changed to increase immunogenicity. Furthermore, 12-month immunisation was added to improve durability. In the HIV Vaccine Trials Network (HVTN) 100 trial, we aimed to assess this new regionally adapted regimen for advancement to efficacy testing., Methods: HVTN 100 is a phase 1/2, randomised controlled, double-blind trial at six community research sites in South Africa. We randomly allocated adults (aged 18-40 years) without HIV infection and at low risk of HIV infection to either the vaccine regimen (intramuscular injection of ALVAC-HIV vector [vCP2438] at 0, 1, 3, 6, and 12 months plus bivalent subtype C gp120 and MF59 adjuvant at 3, 6, and 12 months) or placebo, in a 5:1 ratio. Randomisation was done by computer-generated list. Participants, investigators, and those assessing outcomes were masked to random assignments. Primary outcomes included safety and immune responses associated with correlates of HIV risk in RV144, 2 weeks after vaccination at 6 months (month 6·5). We compared per-protocol participants (ie, those who completed the first four vaccinations and provided samples at month 6·5) from HVTN 100 with stored RV144 samples assayed contemporaneously. This trial is registered with the South African National Clinical Trials Registry (DOH-27-0215-4796) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02404311)., Findings: Between Feb 9, 2015, and May 26, 2015, 252 participants were enrolled, of whom 210 were assigned vaccine and 42 placebo. 222 participants were included in the per-protocol analysis (185 vaccine and 37 placebo). 185 (100%) vaccine recipients developed IgG binding antibodies to all three vaccine-matched gp120 antigens with significantly higher titres (3·6-8·8 fold; all p<0·0001) than the corresponding vaccine-matched responses of RV144. The CD4+ T-cell response to the ZM96.C env protein in HVTN 100 was 56·4% (n=102 responders), compared with a response of 41·4% (n=79 responders) to 92TH023.AE in RV144 (p=0·0050). The IgG response to the 1086.C variable loops 1 and 2 (V1V2) env antigen in HVTN 100 was 70·5% (95% CI 63·5-76·6; n=129 responders), lower than the response to V1V2 in RV144 (99·0%, 95% CI 96·4-99·7; n=199 responders)., Interpretation: Although the IgG response to the HVTN 100 vaccine was lower than that reported in RV144, it exceeded the predicted 63% threshold needed for 50% vaccine efficacy using a V1V2 correlate of protection model. Thus, the subtype C HIV vaccine regimen qualified for phase 2b/3 efficacy testing, a critical next step of vaccine development., Funding: US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), and Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation., (Copyright © 2018 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)