Search

The safety and immunogenicity of a candidate HIV DNA vaccine administered by using a needle-free device is evaluated. The results have shown that the HIV DNA vaccine is safe and well tolerated and it has led to the development of a 4-plasmid multiclade HIV DNA Vaccine Research Center vaccine candidate in which envelope genes expressing Env from clades A, B, and C and Nef gene from clade B is added.

Background: Seasonal influenza results in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide, but the currently licensed inactivated vaccines generally have low vaccine efficacies and could be improved. In this phase 1 clinical trial, we compared seasonal influenza vaccine regimens with different priming strategies, prime-boost intervals, and administration routes to determine the impact of these variables on the resulting antibody response. Methods: Between August 17, 2012 and January 25, 2013, four sites enrolled healthy adults 18–70 years of age. Subjects were randomized to receive one of the following vaccination regimens: trivalent hemagglutinin (HA) DNA prime followed by trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3) boost with a 3.5 month interval (DNA-IIV3), IIV3 prime followed by IIV3 boost with a 10 month interval (IIV3-IIV3), or concurrent DNA and IIV3 prime followed by IIV3 boost with a 10 month interval (DNA/IIV3-IIV3). Each regimen was additionally stratified by an IIV3 administration route of either intramuscular (IM) or intradermal (ID). DNA vaccines were administered by a needle-free jet injector (Biojector). Study objectives included evaluating the safety and tolerability of each regimen and measuring the antibody response by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI). Results: Three hundred and sixteen subjects enrolled. Local reactogenicity was mild to moderate in severity, with higher frequencies recorded following DNA vaccine administered by Biojector compared to IIV3 by either route (p <0.02 for pain, swelling, and redness) and following IIV3 by ID route compared to IM route (p <0.001 for swelling and redness). Systemic reactogenicity was similar between regimens. Though no overall differences were observed between regimens, the highest titers post boost were observed in the DNA-IIV3 group by ID route and in the IIV3-IIV3 group by IM route. Conclusions: All vaccination regimens were found to be safe and tolerable. While there were no overall differences between regimens, the DNA-IIV3 group by ID route, and the IIV3-IIV3 group by IM route, showed higher responses compared to the other same-route regimens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children are susceptible to severe influenza infections and facilitate community transmission. One potential strategy to improve vaccine immunogenicity in children against seasonal influenza involves a trivalent hemagglutinin DNA prime-trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3) boost regimen. Methods: Sites enrolled adolescents, followed by younger children, to receive DNA prime (1 mg or 4 mg) intramuscularly by needle-free jet injector (Biojector), followed by split virus 2012/13 seasonal IIV3 boost by needle and syringe approximately 18 weeks later. A comparator group received IIV3 prime and boost at similar intervals. Primary study objectives included evaluation of the safety and tolerability of the vaccine regimens, with secondary objectives of measuring antibody responses at four weeks post boost by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) and neutralization assays. Results: Seventy-five children ≥6 to ≤17 years old enrolled. Local reactogenicity was higher after DNA prime compared to IIV3 prime (p<0.001 for pain/tenderness, redness, or swelling), but symptoms were mild to moderate in severity. Systemic reactogenicity was similar between vaccines. Overall, antibody responses were similar among groups, although HAI antibodies revealed a trend towards higher responses following 4 mg DNA-IIV3 compared to IIV3-IIV3. The fold increase of HAI antibodies to A/California/07/2009 [A(H1N1)pdm09] was significantly greater following 4 mg DNA-IIV3 (10.12 fold, 5.60–18.27 95%CI) compared to IIV3-IIV3 (3.86 fold, 2.32–6.44 95%CI). Similar neutralizing titers were observed between regimens, with a trend towards increased response frequencies in 4 mg DNA-IIV3. However, significant differences in fold increase, reported as geometric mean fold ratios, were detected against the H1N1 viruses within the neutralization panel: A/New Caledonia/20/1999 (1.41 fold, 1.10–1.81 95%CI) and A/South Carolina/1/1918 (1.55 fold, 1.27–1.89 95%CI). Conclusions: In this first pediatric DNA vaccine study conducted in the U.S., the DNA prime-IIV3 boost regimen was safe and well tolerated. In children, the 4 mg DNA-IIV3 regimen resulted in antibody responses comparable to the IIV3-IIV3 regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Author(s): Andrew S Ishizuka; Kirsten E Lyke; Adam DeZure; Andrea A Berry; Thomas L Richie; Floreliz H Mendoza; Mary E Enama; Ingelise J Gordon; Lee-Jah Chang; Uzma N Sarwar; Kathryn [...]

Background: VRC 012 was a Phase I study of a prototype recombinant adenoviral-vector serotype-35 (rAd35) HIV vaccine, the precursor to two recently published clinical trials, HVTN 077 and 083. On the basis of prior evaluation of multiclade rAd5 HIV vaccines, Envelope A (EnvA) was selected as the standard antigen for a series of prototype HIV vaccines to compare various vaccine platforms. In addition, prior studies of rAd5-vectored vaccines suggested pre-existing human immunity may be a confounding factor in vaccine efficacy. rAd35 is less seroprevalent across human populations and was chosen for testing alone and in combination with a rAd5-EnvA vaccine in the present two-part phase I study. Methods: First, five subjects each received a single injection of 109, 1010, or 1011 particle units (PU) of rAd35-EnvA in an open-label, dose-escalation study. Next, 20 Ad5/Ad35-seronegative subjects were randomized to blinded, heterologous prime-boost schedules combining rAd5-EnvA and rAd35-EnvA with a three month interval. rAd35-EnvA was given at 1010 or 1011 PU to ten subjects each; all rAd5-EnvA injections were 1010 PU. EnvA-specific immunogenicity was assessed four weeks post-injection. Solicited reactogenicity and clinical safety were followed after each injection. Results: Vaccinations were well tolerated at all dosages. Antibody responses measured by ELISA were detected at 4 weeks in 30% and 50% of subjects after single doses of 1010 or 1011 PU rAd35, respectively, and in 89% after a single rAd5-EnvA 1010 PU injection. EnvA-specific IFN-γ ELISpot responses were detected at four weeks in 0%, 70%, and 50% of subjects after the respective rAd35-EnvA dosages compared to 89% of subjects after rAd5. T cell responses were higher after a single rAd5-EnvA 1010 PU injection than after a single rAd35-EnvA 1010 PU injection, and humoral responses were low after a single dose of either vector. Of those completing the vaccine schedule, 100% of rAd5-EnvA recipients and 90% of rAd35-EnvA recipients had both T cell and humoral responses after boosting with the heterologous vector. ELISpot response magnitude was similar in both regimens and comparable to a single dose of rAd5. A trend toward more robust CD8 T cell responses using rAd5-EnvA prime and rAd35-EnvA boost was observed. Humoral response magnitude was also similar after either heterologous regimen, but was several fold higher than after a single dose of rAd5. Adverse events (AEs) related to study vaccines were in general mild and limited to one episode of hematuria, Grade two. Activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) AEs were consistent with an in vitro effect on the laboratory assay for aPTT due to a transient induction of anti-phospholipid antibody, a phenomenon that has been reported in other adenoviral vector vaccine trials. Conclusions: Limitations of the rAd vaccine vectors, including the complex interactions among pre-existing adenoviral immunity and vaccine-induced immune responses, have prompted investigators to include less seroprevalent vectors such as rAd35-EnvA in prime-boost regimens. The rAd35-EnvA vaccine described here was well tolerated and immunogenic. While it effectively primed and boosted antibody responses when given in a reciprocal prime-boost regimen with rAd5-EnvA using a three-month interval, it did not significantly improve the frequency or magnitude of T cell responses above a single dose of rAd5. The humoral and cellular immunogenicity data reported here may inform future vaccine and study design. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses findings of a study on virologic effects of neutralizing antibody VRC01 administration during chronic HIV-1 infection. It states analysis of the impact of VRC01, a potent human mAb targeting the HIV-1 CD4 binding site, on ART-treated and untreated HIV-1–infected subjects, and mentions that single infusion of mAb VRC01 significantly decreased plasma viremia and preferentially suppressed neutralization-sensitive virus strains. It notes virological effect the antibody.

Background: The efficacy of current influenza vaccines is limited in vulnerable populations. DNA vaccines can be produced rapidly, and may offer a potential strategy to improve vaccine immunogenicity, indicated by studies with H5 influenza DNA vaccine prime followed by inactivated vaccine boost. Methods: Four sites enrolled healthy adults, randomized to receive 2011/12 seasonal influenza DNA vaccine prime (n=65) or phosphate buffered saline (PBS) (n=66) administered intramuscularly with Biojector. All subjects received the 2012/13 seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine, trivalent (IIV3) 36 weeks after the priming injection. Vaccine safety and tolerability was the primary objective and measurement of antibody response by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) was the secondary objective. Results: The DNA vaccine prime-IIV3 boost regimen was safe and well tolerated. Significant differences in HAI responses between the DNA vaccine prime and the PBS prime groups were not detected in this study. Conclusion: While DNA priming significantly improved the response to a conventional monovalent H5 vaccine in a previous study, it was not effective in adults using seasonal influenza strains, possibly due to pre-existing immunity to the prime, unmatched prime and boost antigens, or the lengthy 36 week boost interval. Careful optimization of the DNA prime-IIV3 boost regimen as related to antigen matching, interval between vaccinations, and pre-existing immune responses to influenza is likely to be needed in further evaluations of this vaccine strategy. In particular, testing this concept in younger age groups with less prior exposure to seasonal influenza strains may be informative. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A novel, swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus was detected worldwide in April 2009, and the World Health Organization (WHO) declared a global pandemic that June. DNA vaccine priming improves responses to inactivated influenza vaccines. We describe the rapid production and clinical evaluation of a DNA vaccine encoding the hemagglutinin protein of the 2009 pandemic A/California/04/2009(H1N1) influenza virus, accomplished nearly two months faster than production of A/California/07/2009(H1N1) licensed monovalent inactivated vaccine (MIV). Methods: 20 subjects received three H1 DNA vaccinations (4 mg intramuscularly with Biojector) at 4-week intervals. Eighteen subjects received an optional boost when the licensed H1N1 MIV became available. The interval between the third H1 DNA injection and MIV boost was 3–17 weeks. Vaccine safety was assessed by clinical observation, laboratory parameters, and 7-day solicited reactogenicity. Antibody responses were assessed by ELISA, HAI and neutralization assays, and T cell responses by ELISpot and flow cytometry. Results: Vaccinations were safe and well-tolerated. As evaluated by HAI, 6/20 developed positive responses at 4 weeks after third DNA injection and 13/18 at 4 weeks after MIV boost. Similar results were detected in neutralization assays. T cell responses were detected after DNA and MIV. The antibody responses were significantly amplified by the MIV boost, however, the boost did not increased T cell responses induced by DNA vaccine. Conclusions: H1 DNA vaccine was produced quickly, was well-tolerated, and had modest immunogenicity as a single agent. Other HA DNA prime-MIV boost regimens utilizing one DNA prime vaccination and longer boost intervals have shown significant immunogenicity. Rapid and large-scale production of HA DNA vaccines has the potential to contribute to an efficient response against future influenza pandemics. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Needle-free delivery improves the immunogenicity of DNA vaccines but is also associated with more local reactogenicity. Here we report the first comparison of Biojector and needle administration of a candidate rAd5 HIV vaccine. Methods: Thirty-one adults, 18–55 years, 20 naive and 11 prior rAd5 vaccine recipients were randomized to receive single rAd5 vaccine via needle or Biojector IM injection at 1010 PU in a Phase I open label clinical trial. Solicited reactogenicity was collected for 5 days; clinical safety and immunogenicity follow-up was continued for 24 weeks. Results: Overall, injections by either method were well tolerated. There were no serious adverse events. Frequency of any local reactogenicity was 16/16 (100%) for Biojector compared to 11/15 (73%) for needle injections. There was no difference in HIV Env-specific antibody response between Biojector and needle delivery. Env-specific antibody responses were more than 10-fold higher in subjects receiving a booster dose of rAd5 vaccine than after a single dose delivered by either method regardless of interval between prime and boost. Conclusions: Biojector delivery did not improve antibody responses to the rAd5 vaccine compared to needle administration. Homologous boosting with rAd5 gene-based vectors can boost insert-specific antibody responses despite pre-existing vector-specific immunity. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00709605 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Phase 1 evaluation of the VRC HIV DNA and rAd5 vaccines delivered intramuscularly (IM) supported proceeding to a Phase 2 b efficacy study. Here we report comparison of the IM, subcutaneous (SC) and intradermal (ID) routes of administration. Methods: Sixty subjects were randomized to 6 schedules to evaluate the IM, SC or ID route for prime injections. Three schedules included DNA primes (Wks 0,4,8) and 3 schedules included rAd5 prime (Wk0); all included rAd5 IM boost (Wk24). DNA vaccine dosage was 4 mg IM or SC, but 0.4 mg ID, while all rAd5 vaccinations were 1010 PU. All injections were administered by needle and syringe. Results: Overall, 27/30 subjects completed 3 DNA primes; 30/30 subjects completed rAd5 primes. Mild local pruritus (itchiness), superficial skin lesions and injection site nodules were associated with ID and SC, but not IM injections. All routes induced T-cell and antibody immune responses after rAd5 boosting. Overall, >95% had Env antibody and >80% had Env T-cell responses. Conclusions: The pattern of local reactogenicity following ID and SC injections differed from IM injections but all routes were well-tolerated. There was no evidence of an immunogenicity advantage following SC or ID delivery, supporting IM delivery as the preferred route of administration. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00321061 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. The licensing of herpes zoster vaccine has demonstrated that therapeutic vaccination can help control chronic viral infection. Unfortunately, human trials of immunodeficiency virus (HIV) vaccine have shown only marginal efficacy.Methods. In this double-blind study, 17 HIV-infected individuals with viral loads of <50 copies/mL and CD4+ T-cell counts of >350 cells/µL were randomly assigned to the vaccine or placebo arm. Vaccine recipients received 3 intramuscular injections of HIV DNA (4 mg) coding for clade B Gag, Pol, and Nef and clade A, B, and C Env, followed by a replication-deficient adenovirus type 5 boost (1010 particle units) encoding all DNA vaccine antigens except Nef. Humoral, total T-cell, and CD8+ cytotoxic T-lymphocyte (CTL) responses were studied before and after vaccination. Single-copy viral loads and frequencies of latently infected CD4+ T cells were determined.Results. Vaccination was safe and well tolerated. Significantly stronger HIV-specific T-cell responses against Gag, Pol, and Env, with increased polyfunctionality and a broadened epitope-specific CTL repertoire, were observed after vaccination. No changes in single-copy viral load or the frequency of latent infection were observed.Conclusions. Vaccination of individuals with existing HIV-specific immunity improved the magnitude, breadth, and polyfunctionality of HIV-specific memory T-cell responses but did not impact markers of viral control.Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00270465 [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: DNA vaccine immunogenicity has been limited by inefficient delivery. Needle-free delivery of DNA using a CO2-powered Biojector® device was compared to delivery by needle and syringe and evaluated for safety and immunogenicity. Methods: Forty adults, 18–50 years, were randomly assigned to intramuscular (IM) vaccinations with DNA vaccine, VRC-HIVDNA016-00-VP, (weeks 0, 4, 8) by Biojector® 2000™ or needle and syringe (N/S) and boosted IM at week 24 with VRC-HIVADV014-00-VP (rAd5) with N/S at 1010 or 1011 particle units (PU). Equal numbers per assigned schedule had low (≤500) or high (>500) reciprocal titers of preexisting Ad5 neutralizing antibody. Results: 120 DNA and 39 rAd5 injections were given; 36 subjects completed follow-up research sample collections. IFN-γ ELISpot response rates were 17/19 (89%) for Biojector® and 13/17 (76%) for N/S delivery at Week 28 (4 weeks post rAd5 boost). The magnitude of ELISpot response was about 3-fold higher in Biojector® compared to N/S groups. Similar effects on response rates and magnitude were observed for CD8+, but not CD4+ T-cell responses by ICS. Env-specific antibody responses were about 10-fold higher in Biojector-primed subjects. Conclusions: DNA vaccination by Biojector® was well-tolerated and compared to needle injection, primed for greater IFN-γ ELISpot, CD8+ T-cell, and antibody responses after rAd5 boosting. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00109629 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Induction of HIV-1-specific T-cell responses relevant to diverse subtypes is a major goal of HIV vaccine development. Prime-boost regimens using heterologous gene-based vaccine vectors have induced potent, polyfunctional T cell responses in preclinical studies. Methods: The first opportunity to evaluate the immunogenicity of DNA priming followed by recombinant adenovirus serotype 5 (rAd5) boosting was as open-label rollover trials in subjects who had been enrolled in prior studies of HIV-1 specific DNA vaccines. All subjects underwent apheresis before and after rAd5 boosting to characterize in depth the T cell and antibody response induced by the heterologous DNA/rAd5 prime-boost combination. Results: rAd5 boosting was well-tolerated with no serious adverse events. Compared to DNA or rAd5 vaccine alone, sequential DNA/rAd5 administration induced 7-fold higher magnitude Env-biased HIV-1-specific CD8+ T-cell responses and 100-fold greater antibody titers measured by ELISA. There was no significant neutralizing antibody activity against primary isolates. Vaccine-elicited CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells expressed multiple functions and were predominantly long-term (CD127+) central or effector memory T cells and that persisted in blood for >6 months. Epitopes mapped in Gag and Env demonstrated partial cross-clade recognition. Conclusion: Heterologous prime-boost using vector-based gene delivery of vaccine antigens is a potent immunization strategy for inducing both antibody and T-cell responses. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrails.gov NCT00102089, NCT00108654 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Chikungunya virus--a mosquito-borne alphavirus--is endemic in Africa and south and southeast Asia and has recently emerged in the Caribbean. No drugs or vaccines are available for treatment or prevention. We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of a new candidate vaccine. Methods VRC 311 was a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label clinical trial of a virus-like particle (VLP) chikungunya virus vaccine, VRC-CHKVLP059-00-VP, in healthy adults aged 18--50 years who were enrolled at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (Bethesda, MD, USA). Participants were assigned to sequential dose level groups to receive vaccinations at 10 μg, 20 μg, or 40 μg on weeks 0, 4, and 20, with follow-up for 44 weeks after enrolment. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of the vaccine. Secondary endpoints were chikungunya virus-specific immune responses assessed by ELISA and neutralising antibody assays. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01489358. Findings 25 participants were enrolled from Dec 12, 2011, to March 22, 2012, into the three dosage groups: 10 μg (n=5), 20 μg (n=10), and 40 μg (n=10). The protocol was completed by all five participants at the 10 μg dose, all ten participants at the 20 μg dose, and eight of ten participants at the 40 μg dose; non-completions were for personal circumstances unrelated to adverse events. 73 vaccinations were administered. All injections were well tolerated, with no serious adverse events reported. Neutralising antibodies were detected in all dose groups after the second vaccination (geometric mean titres of the half maximum inhibitory concentration: 2688 in the 10 μg group, 1775 in the 20 μg group, and 7246 in the 40 μg group), and a significant boost occurred after the third vaccination in all dose groups (10 μg group p=0⋅0197, 20 μg group p<0⋅0001, and 40 μg group p<0⋅0001). 4 weeks after the third vaccination, the geometric mean titres of the half maximum inhibitory concentration were 8745 for the 10 μg group, 4525 for the 20 μg group, and 5390 for the 40 μg group. Interpretation The chikungunya VLP vaccine was immunogenic, safe, and well tolerated. This study represents an important step in vaccine development to combat this rapidly emerging pathogen. Further studies should be done in a larger number of participants and in more diverse populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Modified vaccinia Ankara (MVA) was evaluated as an alternative to Dryvax® in vaccinia-naïve and vaccinia-immune adult volunteers. Subjects received intramuscular MVA or placebo followed by Dryvax® challenge at 3 months. Two or more doses of MVA prior to Dryvax® reduced severity of lesion formation, decreased magnitude and duration of viral shedding, and augmented post-Dryvax® vaccinia-specific CD8+ T cell responses and extracellular enveloped virus protein-specific antibody responses. MVA vaccination is safe and immunogenic and improves the safety and immunogenicity of subsequent Dryvax® vaccination supporting the potential for using MVA as a vaccine in the general population to improve immunity to orthopoxviruses. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]