Search

The detection of vaccine-induced HIV antibody responses by rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs) may confound the interpretation of HIV testing results. We assessed the impact of vaccine-induced seroreactivity (VISR) on the diagnosis of HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. Samples collected from healthy participants of HIVIS and TaMoVac HIV vaccine trials after the final vaccination were analyzed for VISR using HIV testing algorithms used in Mozambique and Tanzania that employ two sequential RDTs. The samples were also tested for VISR using Enzygnost HIV Integral 4 ELISA and HIV western blot assays. Antibody titers to subtype C gp140 were determined using an in-house enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The frequency of VISR was 93.4% (128/137) by Enzygnost HIV Integral 4 ELISA, and 66.4% (91/137) by western blot assay (WHO interpretation). The proportion of vaccine recipients that would have been misdiagnosed as HIV-positive in Mozambique was half of that in Tanzania: 26.3% (36/137) and 54.0% (74/137), respectively, p < 0.0001. In conclusion, the HIV RDTs and algorithms assessed here will potentially misclassify a large proportion of the HIV vaccine recipients if no other test is used. Increased efforts are needed to develop differential serological or molecular tools for use at the point of care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of (i) an intradermal HIV-DNA regimen given with/without intradermal electroporation (EP) as prime and (ii) the impact of boosting with modified vaccinia virus Ankara (HIV-MVA) administered with or without subtype C CN54rgp140 envelope protein adjuvanted with Glucopyranosyl Lipid A (GLA-AF) in volunteers from Tanzania and Mozambique., Methods: Healthy HIV-uninfected adults (N = 191) were randomized twice; first to one of three HIV-DNA intradermal priming regimens by needle-free ZetaJet device at weeks 0, 4 and 12 (Group I: 2x0.1mL [3mg/mL], Group II: 2x0.1mL [3mg/mL] plus EP, Group III: 1x0.1mL [6mg/mL] plus EP). Second the same volunteers received 108 pfu HIV-MVA twice, alone or combined with CN54rgp140/GLA-AF, intramuscularly by syringe, 16 weeks apart. Additionally, 20 volunteers received saline placebo., Results: Vaccinations and electroporation did not raise safety concerns. After the last vaccination, the overall IFN-γ ELISpot response rate to either Gag or Env was 97%. Intradermal electroporation significantly increased ELISpot response rates to HIV-DNA-specific Gag (66% group I vs. 86% group II, p = 0.026), but not to the HIV-MVA vaccine-specific Gag or Env peptide pools nor the magnitude of responses. Co-administration of rgp140/GLA-AF with HIV-MVA did not impact the frequency of binding antibody responses against subtype B gp160, C gp140 or E gp120 antigens (95%, 99%, 79%, respectively), but significantly enhanced the magnitude against subtype B gp160 (2700 versus 300, p<0.001) and subtype C gp140 (24300 versus 2700, p<0.001) Env protein. At relatively low titers, neutralizing antibody responses using the TZM-bl assay were more frequent in vaccinees given adjuvanted protein boost., Conclusion: Intradermal electroporation increased DNA-induced Gag response rates but did not show an impact on Env-specific responses nor on the magnitude of responses. Co-administration of HIV-MVA with rgp140/GLA-AF significantly enhanced antibody responses., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.