Back to Search Start Over

Phase 1 Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) Vaccine Trial to Evaluate the Safety and Immunogenicity of HIV Subtype C DNA and MF59-Adjuvanted Subtype C Envelope Protein.

Authors :
Hosseinipour, Mina C
Innes, Craig
Naidoo, Sarita
Mann, Philipp
Hutter, Julia
Ramjee, Gita
Sebe, Modulakgotla
Maganga, Lucas
Herce, Michael E
deCamp, Allan C
Marshall, Kyle
Dintwe, One
Andersen-Nissen, Erica
Tomaras, Georgia D
Mkhize, Nonhlanhla
Morris, Lynn
Jensen, Ryan
Miner, Maurine D
Pantaleo, Giuseppe
Ding, Song
Source :
Clinical Infectious Diseases. Jan2021, Vol. 72 Issue 1, p50-60. 11p.
Publication Year :
2021

Abstract

Background The Pox-Protein Public-Private Partnership is performing a suite of trials to evaluate the bivalent subtype C envelope protein (TV1.C and 1086.C glycoprotein 120) vaccine in the context of different adjuvants and priming agents for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 (HIV-1) prevention. Methods In the HIV Vaccine Trials Network 111 trial, we compared the safety and immunogenicity of DNA prime followed by DNA/protein boost with DNA/protein coadministration injected intramuscularly via either needle/syringe or a needle-free injection device (Biojector). One hundred thirty-two healthy, HIV-1–uninfected adults were enrolled from Zambia, South Africa, and Tanzania and were randomized to 1 of 6 arms: DNA prime, protein boost by needle/syringe; DNA and protein coadministration by needle/syringe; placebo by needle/syringe; DNA prime, protein boost with DNA given by Biojector; DNA and protein coadministration with DNA given by Biojector; and placebo by Biojector. Results All vaccinations were safe and well tolerated. DNA and protein coadministration was associated with increased HIV-1 V1/V2 antibody response rate, a known correlate of decreased HIV-1 infection risk. DNA administration by Biojector elicited significantly higher CD4+ T-cell response rates to HIV envelope protein than administration by needle/syringe in the prime/boost regimen (85.7% vs 55.6%; P =.02), but not in the coadministration regimen (43.3% vs 48.3%; P =.61). Conclusions Both the prime/boost and coadministration regimens are safe and may be promising for advancement into efficacy trials depending on whether cellular or humoral responses are desired. Clinical Trials Registration South African National Clinical Trials Registry (application 3947; Department of Health [DoH] no. DOH-27–0715–4917) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02997969). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
10584838
Volume :
72
Issue :
1
Database :
Academic Search Index
Journal :
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
148277759
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz1239