Search

Multiple active vaccination approaches have proven ineffective in reducing the substantial morbidity and mortality caused by respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in infants and older adults (aged ≥65 years). A vaccine conferring a substantial and sustainable boost in neutralising activity is required to protect against severe RSV disease. To that end, we evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of DS-Cav1, a prefusion F subunit vaccine.In this randomised, open-label, phase 1 clinical trial, the stabilised prefusion F vaccine DS-Cav1 was evaluated for dose, safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity in healthy adults aged 18-50 years at a single US site. Participants were assigned to receive escalating doses of either 50 μg, 150 μg, or 500 μg DS-Cav1 at weeks 0 and 12, and were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio within each dose group to receive the vaccine with or without aluminium hydroxide (AlOH) adjuvant. After 71 participants had been randomised, the protocol was amended to allow some participants to receive a single vaccination at week 0. The primary objectives evaluated the safety and tolerability at every dose within 28 days following each injection. Neutralising activity and RSV F-binding antibodies were evaluated from week 0 to week 44 as secondary and exploratory objectives. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one vaccine dose; secondary and exploratory immunogenicity analysis included all participants with available data at a given visit. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03049488, and is complete and no longer recruiting.Between Feb 21, 2017, and Nov 29, 2018, 244 participants were screened for eligibility and 95 were enrolled to receive DS-Cav1 at the 50 μg (n=30, of which n=15 with AlOH), 150 μg (n=35, of which n=15 with AlOH), or 500 μg (n=30, of which n=15 with AlOH) doses. DS-Cav1 was safe and well tolerated and no serious vaccine-associated adverse events deemed related to the vaccine were identified. DS-Cav1 vaccination elicited robust neutralising activity and binding antibodies by 4 weeks after a single vaccination (p0·0001 for F-binding and neutralising antibodies). In analyses of exploratory endpoints at week 44, pre-F-binding IgG and neutralising activity were significantly increased compared with baseline in all groups. At week 44, RSV A neutralising activity was 3·1 fold above baseline in the 50 μg group, 3·8 fold in the 150 μg group, and 4·5 fold in the 500 μg group (p0·0001). RSV B neutralising activity was 2·8 fold above baseline in the 50 μg group, 3·4 fold in the 150 μg group, and 3·7 fold in the 500 μg group (p0·0001). Pre-F-binding IgG remained significantly 3·2 fold above baseline in the 50 μg group, 3·4 fold in the 150 μg group, and 4·0 fold in the 500 μg group (p0·0001). Pre-F-binding serum IgA remained 4·1 fold above baseline in the 50 μg group, 4·3 fold in the 150 μg group, and 4·8 fold in the 500 μg group (p0·0001). Although a higher vaccine dose or second immunisation elicited a transient advantage compared with lower doses or a single immunisation, neither significantly impacted long-term neutralisation. There was no long-term effect of dose, number of vaccinations, or adjuvant on neutralising activity.In this phase 1 study, DS-Cav1 vaccination was safe and well tolerated. DS-Cav1 vaccination elicited a robust boost in RSV F-specific antibodies and neutralising activity that was sustained above baseline for at least 44 weeks. A single low-dose of pre-F immunisation of antigen-experienced individuals might confer protection that extends throughout an entire RSV season.The National Institutes of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

Western (WEEV), eastern (EEEV), and Venezuelan (VEEV) equine encephalitis viruses are mosquito-borne pathogens classified as potential biological warfare agents for which there are currently no approved human vaccines or therapies. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an investigational trivalent virus-like particle (VLP) vaccine, western, eastern, and Venezuelan equine encephalitis (WEVEE) VLP, composed of WEEV, EEEV, and VEEV VLPs.The WEVEE VLP vaccine was evaluated in a phase 1, randomised, open-label, dose-escalation trial at the Hope Clinic of the Emory Vaccine Center at Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA. Eligible participants were healthy adults aged 18-50 years with no previous vaccination history with an investigational alphavirus vaccine. Participants were assigned to a dose group of 6 μg, 30 μg, or 60 μg vaccine product and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive the WEVEE VLP vaccine with or without aluminium hydroxide suspension (alum) adjuvant by intramuscular injection at study day 0 and at week 8. The primary outcomes were the safety and tolerability of the vaccine (assessed in all participants who received at least one administration of study product) and the secondary outcome was immune response measured as neutralising titres by plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT) 4 weeks after the second vaccination. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03879603.Between April 2, 2019, and June 13, 2019, 30 trial participants were enrolled (mean age 32 years, range 21-48; 16 [53%] female participants and 14 [47%] male participants). Six groups of five participants each received 6 μg, 30 μg, or 60 μg vaccine doses with or without adjuvant, and all 30 participants completed study follow-up. Vaccinations were safe and well tolerated. The most frequently reported symptoms were mild injection-site pain and tenderness (22 [73%] of 30) and malaise (15 [50%] of 30). Dose-dependent differences in the frequency of pain and tenderness were found between the 6 μg, 30 μg, and 60 μg groups (p=0·0217). No significant differences were observed between dosing groups for any other reactogenicity symptom. Two adverse events (mild elevated blood pressure and moderate asymptomatic neutropenia) were assessed as possibly related to the study product in one trial participant (60 μg dose with alum); both resolved without clinical sequelae. 4 weeks after second vaccine administration, neutralising antibodies were induced in all study groups with the highest response seen against all three vaccine antigens in the 30 μg plus alum group (PRNTThe favourable safety profile and neutralising antibody responses, along with pressing public health need, support further evaluation of the WEVEE VLP vaccine in advanced-phase clinical trials.The Vaccine Research Center of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health funded the clinical trial. The US Department of Defense contributed funding for manufacturing of the study product.

BackgroundThe unprecedented 2014 epidemic of Ebola virus disease (EVD) prompted an international response to accelerate the availability of a preventive vaccine. A replication-defective recombinant chimpanzee adenovirus type 3–vectored ebolavirus vaccine (cAd3-EBO), encoding the glycoprotein from Zaire and Sudan species, that offers protection in the nonhuman primate model, was rapidly advanced into phase 1 clinical evaluation. MethodsWe conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial of cAd3-EBO. Twenty healthy adults, in sequentially enrolled groups of 10 each, received vaccination intramuscularly in doses of 2×1010 particle units or 2×1011 particle units. Primary and secondary end points related to safety and immunogenicity were assessed throughout the first 8 weeks after vaccination; in addition, longer-term vaccine durability was assessed at 48 weeks after vaccination. ResultsIn this small study, no safety concerns were identified; however, transient fever developed within 1 day after vaccinat...

Summary Background mAb114 is a single monoclonal antibody that targets the receptor-binding domain of Ebola virus glycoprotein, which prevents mortality in rhesus macaques treated after lethal challenge with Zaire ebolavirus . Here we present expedited data from VRC 608, a phase 1 study to evaluate mAb114 safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. Methods In this phase 1, dose-escalation study (VRC 608), conducted at the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) Clinical Center (Bethesda, MD, USA), healthy adults aged 18–60 years were sequentially enrolled into three mAb114 dose groups of 5 mg/kg, 25 mg/kg, and 50 mg/kg. The drug was given to participants intravenously over 30 min, and participants were followed for 24 weeks. Participants were only enrolled into increased dosing groups after interim safety assessments. Our primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, with pharmacokinetic and anti-drug antibody assessments as secondary endpoints. We assessed safety and tolerability in all participants who received study drug by monitoring clinical laboratory data and self-report and direct clinician assessment of prespecified infusion-site symptoms 3 days after infusion and systemic symptoms 7 days after infusion. Unsolicited adverse events were recorded for 28 days. Pharmacokinetic and anti-drug antibody assessments were completed in participants with at least 56 days of data. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03478891, and is active but no longer recruiting. Findings Between May 16, and Sept 27, 2018, 19 eligible individuals were enrolled. One (5%) participant was not infused because intravenous access was not adequate. Of 18 (95%) remaining participants, three (17%) were assigned to the 5 mg/kg group, five (28%) to the 25 mg/kg group, and ten (55%) to the 50 mg/kg group, each of whom received a single infusion of mAb114 at their assigned dose. All infusions were well tolerated and completed over 30–37 min with no infusion reactions or rate adjustments. All participants who received the study drug completed the safety assessment of local and systemic reactogenicity. No participants reported infusion-site symptoms. Systemic symptoms were all mild and present only in four (22%) of 18 participants across all dosing groups. No unsolicited adverse events occurred related to mAb114 and one serious adverse event occurred that was unrelated to mAb114. mAb114 has linear pharmacokinetics and a half-life of 24·2 days (standard error of measurement 0·2) with no evidence of anti-drug antibody development. Interpretation mAb114 was well tolerated, showed linear pharmacokinetics, and was easily and rapidly infused, making it an attractive and deployable option for treatment in outbreak settings. Funding Vaccine Research Center, US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and NIH.

Summary Background Human monoclonal antibodies that potently and broadly neutralise HIV-1 are under development to prevent and treat HIV-1 infection. In this phase 1 clinical trial we aimed to determine the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic profile of the broadly neutralising monoclonal antibody VRC07-523LS, an engineered variant of VRC01 that targets the CD4 binding site of the HIV-1 envelope protein. Methods This phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation clinical trial was done at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center in Bethesda, MD, USA. Individuals were recruited from the greater Washington, DC, area by IRB-approved written and electronic media. We enrolled healthy, HIV-1-negative adults aged 18–50 years. Inclusion criteria were good general health, measured through clinical laboratory tests, medical history, and physical examination. Participants self-selected into one of seven open groups during enrolment without randomisation. Four groups received a single intravenous dose of 1, 5, 20, or 40 mg/kg of VRC07-523LS, and one group received a single 5 mg/kg subcutaneous dose. Two groups received three doses of either 20 mg/kg intravenous VRC07-523LS, or 5 mg/kg subcutaneous VRC07-523LS at 12-week intervals. The primary outcome was the safety and tolerability of VRC07-523LS, assessed by dose, route, and number of administrations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03015181. Findings Between Feb 21, 2017, and September 13, 2017, we enrolled 26 participants, including 11 (42%) men and 15 (58%) women. Two (8%) participants withdrew from the study early: one participant in group 1 enrolled in the study but never received VRC07-523LS, and one participant in group 6 chose to withdraw after a single administration. One (4%) participant in group 7 received only one of the three scheduled administrations. 17 participants received intravenous administrations and 8 participants received subcutaneous administrations. VRC07-523LS was safe and well tolerated, we observed no serious adverse events or dose-limiting toxic effects. All reported local and systemic reactogenicity was mild to moderate in severity. The most commonly reported symptoms following intravenous administration were malaise or myalgia in three (18%) participants and headache or chills in two (12%) participants. The most commonly reported symptoms following subcutaneous administration were pain and tenderness in four participants (50%) and malaise or headache in three (38%) participants. Interpretation Safe and well tolerated, VRC07-523LS is a strong and practical candidate for inclusion in HIV-1 prevention and therapeutic strategies. The results from this trial also indicate that an HIV-1 broadly neutralising monoclonal antibody engineered for improved pharmacokinetic and neutralisation properties can be safe for clinical use. Funding National Institutes of Health.

Building a better RSV vaccine Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes severe respiratory disease, especially in infants and the elderly. However, attempts to produce effective human vaccines have largely been unsuccessful. Structure-based design has been used to generate an RSV fusion glycoprotein stabilized in its prefusion conformation (DS-Cav1). This immunogen is highly effective in mice and macaques. Crank et al. now report the results of a phase I vaccine clinical trial using the stabilized prefusion DS-Cav1 molecule. Four weeks after immunization, these vaccines elicited substantially more high-quality antibody titers than those typically generated using earlier RSV immunogens. The findings provide a proof of concept for how structural biology can contribute to precision vaccine design. Science , this issue p. 505

Two HPV virus-like particle (VLP) vaccines, HPV-16/18 (GlaxoSmithKline, Cervarix®) and HPV-6/11/16/18 (Merck, Gardasil®), are currently licensed in the United States. Given the similar antigenic content but different adjuvant formulations in the 2 vaccines, they provide an efficient method for evaluating adjuvants and comparing the kinetics of the innate and adaptive immune responses. We randomized women to receive either Cervarix® or Gardasil®, followed 6 month vaccination delivery schedules per manufacturer's recommendations, and analyzed the humoral immune response, T cell response, and circulating plasma cytokine levels in response to vaccination. Cervarix® recipients had higher anti-HPV-16 antibody and neutralization titers at month 7, and elevated anti-HPV-18 antibody and neutralization titers at months 7 and 12. Antibody avidity was similar for the 2 vaccines. HPV-31 was the only phylogenetically related non-vaccine HPV type, for which there is evidence of cross-protection, to be cross-neutralized and only in response to Cervarix®. Comparing CD4+ T cell cytokine responses at month 12, there was a trend of increased levels of IL-2 and TNF-α in the Cervarix® groups versus the Gardasil® groups that was consistent across all 4 tested HPV types (16/18/33/45). Elevated levels of circulating plasma cytokine/chemokines were observed post first vaccination in Gardasil® recipients and proinflammatory cytokines were elevated following 1st and 3rd Cervarix® vaccinations. Cervarix® and Gardasil® are both highly immunogenic vaccines. Higher antibody levels and CD4 T cell responses were achieved with Cervarix® after 3 doses, although similar affinity maturation was measured for the 2 vaccines. The clinical implications of the differences in immune responses are unknown.

Summary Background The Zika virus epidemic and associated congenital infections have prompted rapid vaccine development. We assessed two new DNA vaccines expressing premembrane and envelope Zika virus structural proteins. Methods We did two phase 1, randomised, open-label trials involving healthy adult volunteers. The VRC 319 trial, done in three centres, assessed plasmid VRC5288 (Zika virus and Japanese encephalitis virus chimera), and the VRC 320, done in one centre, assessed plasmid VRC5283 (wild-type Zika virus). Eligible participants were aged 18–35 years in VRC19 and 18–50 years in VRC 320. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 by a computer-generated randomisation schedule prepared by the study statistician. All participants received intramuscular injection of 4 mg vaccine. In VRC 319 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations via needle and syringe at 0 and 8 weeks, 0 and 12 weeks, 0, 4, and 8 weeks, or 0, 4, and 20 weeks. In VRC 320 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations at 0, 4, and 8 weeks via single-dose needle and syringe injection in one deltoid or split-dose needle and syringe or needle-free injection with the Stratis device (Pharmajet, Golden, CO, USA) in each deltoid. Both trials followed up volunteers for 24 months for the primary endpoint of safety, assessed as local and systemic reactogenicity in the 7 days after each vaccination and all adverse events in the 28 days after each vaccination. The secondary endpoint in both trials was immunogenicity 4 weeks after last vaccination. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02840487 and NCT02996461. Findings VRC 319 enrolled 80 participants (20 in each group), and VRC 320 enrolled 45 participants (15 in each group). One participant in VRC 319 and two in VRC 320 withdrew after one dose of vaccine, but were included in the safety analyses. Both vaccines were safe and well tolerated. All local and systemic symptoms were mild to moderate. In both studies, pain and tenderness at the injection site was the most frequent local symptoms (37 [46%] of 80 participants in VRC 319 and 36 [80%] of 45 in VRC 320) and malaise and headache were the most frequent systemic symptoms (22 [27%] and 18 [22%], respectively, in VRC 319 and 17 [38%] and 15 [33%], respectively, in VRC 320). For VRC5283, 14 of 14 (100%) participants who received split-dose vaccinations by needle-free injection had detectable positive antibody responses, and the geometric mean titre of 304 was the highest across all groups in both trials. Interpretation VRC5283 was well tolerated and has advanced to phase 2 efficacy testing. Funding Intramural Research Program of the Vaccine Research Center, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health.

A novel avian influenza subtype, A/H7N9, emerged in 2013 and represents a public health threat with pandemic potential. We have previously shown that DNA vaccine priming increases the magnitude and quality of antibody responses to H5N1 monovalent inactivated boost. We now report the safety and immunogenicity of a H7 DNA-H7N9 monovalent inactivated vaccine prime-boost regimen. In this Phase 1, open label, randomized clinical trial, we evaluated three H7N9 vaccination regimens in healthy adults, with a prime-boost interval of 16 weeks. Group 1 received H7 DNA vaccine prime and H7N9 monovalent inactivated vaccine boost. Group 2 received H7 DNA and H7N9 monovalent inactivated vaccine as a prime and H7N9 monovalent inactivated vaccine as a boost. Group 3 received H7N9 monovalent inactivated vaccine in a homologous prime-boost regimen. Overall, 30 individuals between 20 to 60 years old enrolled and 28 completed both vaccinations. All injections were well tolerated with no serious adverse events. 2 weeks post-boost, 50% of Group 1 and 33% of Group 2 achieved a HAI titer ≥1:40 compared with 11% of Group 3. Also, at least a fourfold increase in neutralizing antibody responses was seen in 90% of Group 1, 100% of Group 2, and 78% of Group 3 subjects. Peak neutralizing antibody geometric mean titers were significantly greater for Group 1 (GMT = 440.61, p, Avian influenza: A vaccine for a deadly emergent strain A vaccine candidate to treat a deadly subtype of avian influenza was shown to induce protective antibodies in initial clinical trials. As of March 2017, avian influenza strain A/H7N9 has killed 497 people since 2013, with 1349 confirmed cases. Julie Ledgerwood and her team from the United States’ National Institutes of Health in collaboration with colleagues at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention tested their two-stage vaccine protocol in humans, showing it to be effective and safe. The vaccine consists of an initial injection of viral DNA, which ‘primes’ the immune system to the pathogen, followed by a follow-up injection of an inactivated purified viral protein, which further boosts the host’s production of protective antibodies. The study shows the viability of this vaccine regimen and suggests further investigation into its appropriateness for treating avian influenza in humans.

Background While PET using F-FDG is most commonly used for imaging malignant tumors, vaccination is known to cause transient inflammation of lymph nodes inducing positive findings on F-FDG PET scans. The pattern, magnitude, and duration of lymph node activation following vaccination have not been clearly defined. Furthermore, the addition of adjuvants to vaccines can further enhance the immune response. The presented study was designed to define lymph node activation following administration of the Food and Drug Administration-licensed human papillomavirus vaccines, Cervarix and Gardasil, which contain similar antigens with different adjuvants. Methods Twenty-seven women aged 18 to 25 years were randomized to receive either Cervarix or Gardasil in the clinical trial VRC 900. Fifteen subjects participated in the PET/CT portion of the trial and received scans of lymph node activation at prevaccination and "1 week" (8-14 days) and "1 month" (23-36 days) after the first or third vaccination. Results PET/CT scans revealed that all vaccine recipients had ipsilateral axillary lymph node activity. Three of 4 Cervarix recipients also showed contralateral lymph node activity 1 month after the first vaccination. For both Cervarix and Gardasil, the SUV activity resolved over time, with activity extended up to day 37 after the first and third vaccinations. Conclusions Following intramuscular vaccination, there were no major differences between duration of uptake and intensity of SUV between Cervarix and Gardasil recipients in ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes. Contralateral node activation was detected up to 1 month after the first vaccination in Cervarix recipients only, possibly reflecting differences in vaccine adjuvant formulation.

Avian influenza virus causes outbreaks in domestic and wild birds around the world, and sporadic human infections have been reported. A DNA vaccine encoding hemagglutinin (HA) protein from the A/Indonesia/5/05 (H5N1) strain was initially tested in two randomized phase I clinical studies. Vaccine Research Center study 304 (VRC 304) was a double-blinded study with 45 subjects randomized to placebo, 1 mg of vaccine, or 4 mg of vaccine treatment groups (n= 15/group) by intramuscular (i.m.) Biojector injection. VRC 305 was an open-label study to evaluate route, with 44 subjects randomized to intradermal (i.d.) injections of 0.5 mg by needle/syringe or by Biojector or 1 mg delivered as two 0.5-mg Biojector injections in the same deltoid or as 0.5 mg in each deltoid (n= 11/group). Injections were administered at weeks 0, 4, and 8 in both studies. Antibody responses to H5 were assessed by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay, enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA), and neutralization assay, and the H5 T cell responses were assessed by enzyme-linked immunospot and intracellular cytokine staining assays. There were no vaccine-related serious adverse events, and the vaccine was well tolerated in all groups. At 1 mg, i.d. vaccination compared to i.m. vaccination induced a greater frequency and magnitude of response by ELISA, but there were no significant differences in the frequency or magnitude of response between the i.d. and i.m. routes in the HAI or neutralization assays. T cell responses were more common in subjects who received the 1- or 4-mg dose i.m. These studies demonstrated that the DNA vaccine encoding H5 is safe and immunogenic and served to define the proper dose and route for further studies. The i.d. injection route did not offer a significant advantage over the i.m. route, and no difference was detected by delivery to one site versus splitting the dose between two sites for i.d. vaccine administration. The 4-mg dose (i.m) was further investigated in prime-boost regimens.

Background The unprecedented 2014 epidemic of Ebola virus disease (EVD) has prompted an international response to accelerate the availability of a preventive vaccine. A replicationdefective recombinant chimpanzee adenovirus type 3–vectored ebolavirus vaccine (cAd3-EBO), encoding the glycoprotein from Zaire and Sudan species that offers protection in the nonhuman primate model, was rapidly advanced into phase 1 clinical evaluation. Methods We conducted a phase 1, dose-escalation, open-label trial of cAd3-EBO. Twenty healthy adults, in sequentially enrolled groups of 10 each, received vaccination intramuscularly in doses of 2×10 10 particle units or 2×10 11 particle units. Primary and secondary end points related to safety and immunogenicity were assessed throughout the first 4 weeks after vaccination. Results In this small study, no safety concerns were identified; however, transient fever developed within 1 day after vaccination in two participants who had received the 2×10 11 particle-unit dose. Glycoprotein-specific antibodies were induced in all 20 participants; the titers were of greater magnitude in the group that received the 2×10 11 particle-unit dose than in the group that received the 2×10 10 particle-unit dose (geometric mean titer against the Zaire antigen, 2037 vs. 331; P = 0.001). Glycoproteinspecific T-cell responses were more frequent among those who received the 2x10 11 particle-unit dose than among those who received the 2×10 10 particle-unit dose, with a CD4 response in 10 of 10 participants versus 3 of 10 participants (P = 0.004) and a CD8 response in 7 of 10 participants versus 2 of 10 participants (P = 0.07). Conclusions Reactogenicity and immune responses to cAd3-EBO vaccine were dose-dependent. At the 2×10 11 particle-unit dose, glycoprotein Zaire–specific antibody responses were in the range reported to be associated with vaccine-induced protective immunity in challenge studies involving nonhuman primates. Clinical trials assessing cAd3-EBO are ongoing. (Funded by the Intramural Research Program of the National Institutes of Health; VRC 207 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02231866.)

Annual influenza vaccination reduces the risks of influenza when the vaccines are well matched to circulating strains, but development of an approach that induces broader and more durable immune responses would be beneficial. We conducted two companion Phase 1 studies, VRC 307 and VRC 309, over sequential seasons (2008–2009 and 2009–2010) in which only the influenza B strain component of the vaccines differed. Objectives were safety and immunogenicity of prime–boost vaccination schedules. A schedule of DNA vaccine encoding for seasonal influenza hemagglutinins (HA) prime followed by seasonal trivalent influenza inactivated vaccine (IIV3) boost (HA DNA–IIV3) was compared to placebo (PBS)–IIV3 or IIV3–IIV3. Cumulatively, 111 adults were randomized to HA DNA–IIV3 (n = 66), PBS–IIV3 (n = 25) or IIV3–IIV3 (n = 20). Safety was assessed by clinical observations, laboratory parameters and 7-day solicited reactogenicity. The seasonal HA DNA prime–IIV3 boost regimen was evaluated as safe and well tolerated. There were no serious adverse events. The local and systemic reactogenicity for HA DNA, IIV and placebo were reported predominantly as none or mild within the first 5 days post-vaccination. There was no significant difference in immunogenicity detected between the treatment groups as evaluated by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) assay. The studies demonstrated the safety and immunogenicity of seasonal HA DNA–IIV3 regimen, but the 3–4 week prime–boost interval was suboptimal for improving influenza-specific immune responses. This is consistent with observations in avian H5 DNA vaccine prime–boost studies in which a long interval, but not a short interval, was associated with improved immunogenicity. Trial Registration: NCT00858611 for VRC 307 and NCT00995982 for VRC 309.

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 NCT01498718

The exceptionally high virulence of the West Nile NY99 strain makes its suitability in the development of a live WN vaccine uncertain. The aim of this study is to investigate the immunogenicity of noninfectious virus derivatives carrying pseudolethal mutations, which preclude virion formation without affecting preceding steps of the viral infectious cycle. When administered using DNA immunization, such constructs initiate an infectious cycle but cannot lead to a viremia. While the magnitude of the immune response to a noninfectious replication-competent construct was lower than that of virus or infectious DNA, its overall quality and the protective effect were similar. In contrast, a nonreplicating construct of similar length induced only a marginally detectable immune response in the dose range used. Thus, replication-competent noninfectious constructs derived from infectious DNA may offer an advantageous combination of the safety of noninfectious formulations with the quality of the immune response characteristic of infectious vaccines.

Seven volunteers involved in flavivirus studies have been immunized with commercial Japanese encephalitis and yellow fever vaccines JE-VAX and YF-VAX. Strong homologous and cross-reactive with West Nile virus (WNV) antibody responses with titers 1:1600 to 1:51200 were found in all donors. All donors developed high levels of yellow fever virus (YFV) and Japanese encephalitis virus (JEV) neutralizing antibodies with titers 1:50 to 1:1600 and 1:20 to 1:640, respectively, and WNV neutralizing antibodies with titers 1:10 to 1:80. In contrast, predominantly YF-specific cell-mediated immunity was detected in all immunized donors. Responses to YFV were long lasting, but the anti-JEV humoral immunity was found to decrease with time. Cross-reactive anti-WNV responses were following the same trend dropping below detectable level at 4 years post-immunization and sharply coming back after booster immunization with the JE vaccine. Thus, immunization with the commercial flavivirus JE vaccine may be beneficial for individuals at high risk of exposure to WNV, such as personnel involved in WN research.

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.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, NCT01489358.25 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 p0·0001, and 40 μg group p0·0001). 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.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.Intramural Research Program of the Vaccine Research Center, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and National Institutes of Health.

This report describes a fast, reproducible, inexpensive and convenient assay system for virus titration in the 96-well format. The micromethod substantially increases assay throughput and improves the data reproducibility. A highly simplified variant of virus quantification is based on immunohistochemical detection of virus amplification foci obtained without use of agarose or semisolid overlays. It can be incorporated into several types of routine virological assays successfully replacing the laborious and time-consuming conventional methods based on plaque formation under semisolid overlays. The method does not depend on the development of CPE and can be accommodated to assay viruses with substantial differences in growth properties. The use of enhanced immunohistochemical detection enabled a five- to six-fold reduction of the total assay time. The micromethod was specifically developed to take advantage of multichannel pipettor use to simplify handling of a large number of samples. The method performs well with an inexpensive low-power binocular, thus offering a routine assay system usable outside of specialized laboratory setting, such as for testing of clinical or field samples. When used in focus reduction-neutralization tests (FRNT), the method accommodates very small volumes of immune serum, which is often a decisive factor in experiments involving small rodent models.

Evidence-based health systems are extremely important for the improvement of global health.1 In 1991, the five republics of central Asia (population 61 million), geopolitically strategically located and rich in natural resources, gained independence from the Soviet Union but inherited the Soviet health-care system. The Cold War limited exposure to international medical science, and reliance on Russian-oriented scientific thinking, with near-exclusive use of the Russian language in national science, created barriers to the use of and contribution to English-based sources of medical science. 20 years after independence, our experience is that these barriers persist. To assess the current contribution of central Asian scientists to medical science, we analysed the quantity and scope of medical literature from central Asia published between January, 2009, and July, 2011. To ascertain perceptions of the use of evidence-based medicine in central Asia, we also did semi-structured interviews with 85 medical scientists, medical educators, and health-care professionals from central Asia (appendix). We identified 345 publications regarding data from central Asia and separated papers into three groups. Group A contained papers with only foreign authors—we used this category to examine publications with no influence by central Asian scientists (n=104). The remaining papers with participation of local authors were separated into two groups on the basis of the affiliation of the first author. Group B contained papers with the first author from central Asia (n=167), and group C contained papers with the first author from outside central Asia (n=74). We reasoned that projects published with the first author from central Asia were probably led by central Asian scientists, whereas the first author from outside central Asia indicated leadership by foreign scientists. Nearly half of all publications (48%, n=167) had the first author from central Asia (5·6 publications per month). Of first-authored papers, Uzbekistan had the highest number of publications and the highest percentage of publications in English (table). Table Publications by country of origin of first author in countries of central Asia, between January, 2009, and July, 2011 The most frequently used languages were English (260 papers) and Russian (82 papers). Papers including foreign authors (groups A and C) were mostly written in English (98/104 [94%] and 68/74 [92%], respectively), and only 95/167 (57%) of papers with the first author from central Asia (group B) were in English. With our analysis restricted to papers with participation of a central Asian author (groups B and C), the two journals that authors published in most frequently were in Russian—Meditsinskaia parazitologiia i parazitarnye bolezni (Med Parazitol) and Gigiena i Sanitariya (Gig Sanit). BioMed Central was the most common English-language journal. Few journals that central Asian scientists publish in are readily accessed by Western scientists. No journals originating in central Asia are indexed in PubMed. We categorised the main subject area for each paper on the basis of keywords or, if keywords were not available, by reviewing the abstract and making our best judgment. The subjects most often addressed were: epidemiology (n=110), public health (n=96), environmental sciences (n=28), chemistry (n=25), general medicine (n=23), genetics (n=22), pharmacology (n=15), and physics (n=9). The emphasis on health sciences was less prominent in group B publications, with pharmacology, chemistry, and physics far more common than in groups A and C. We believe this difference is consistent with the known strength of Russian basic sciences. We examined the impact factor for all English-language journals as a proxy for quality of science. We could not evaluate the Russian-language journals by impact factor because they are not included in the Journal Citation Report. The median impact factor of articles with a central Asian author (groups B and C) was 2·53. Of 85 interviewees, 61 were from Kazakhstan. Most interviewees (67 [79%]) were physicians and a small number (12 [14%]) characterised themselves as making health-care decisions other than at a patient level. Only 15 (18%) participants rated their English as proficient. Although 74 of 84 (88%) interviewees thought evidence-based medicine is important, most respondents (40/66 [61%]) thought that it is not used in health-care decision-making, and only 27/59 (46%) thought English-language sources were used in health-care decision-making. When asked about evidence-based medicine teaching in medical schools or postgraduate education, 34/59 (58%) and 24/54 (44%) of respondents, respectively, thought that evidence-based medicine is not provided or rarely used in the educational process. Employees of western agencies in central Asia such as UN agencies (n=7) were less likely to think evidence-based medicine was used in medical education or that English-language sources were used in health-care decision-making than were the local health-care professionals. The results of our study indicate that countries of central Asia still have barriers to integration into world scientific processes. The disparity of scientific publications between the developing and industrialised worlds has been noted.2 In 2003, former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan noted that developing nations had a population-adjusted proportion of scientists 10–30 times smaller than did developed nations and called for reduction of the resultant research gap that threatened national development.3 The small contribution of central Asian health scientists to world scientific literature and practice, and, conversely, the low use of knowledge from these sources, impedes health-care developments in the region and the ability to assess changes in public health of former Soviet countries.4

DNA technology has been harnessed to produce a variety of plasmid-based vaccines designed to prevent viral, bacterial and parasitic infections. The rapid adoption and implementation of this novel vaccine strategy carries with it important safety and efficacy concerns. This review will focus on whether DNA vaccines (1) are likely to induce systemic or organ-specific autoimmune disease, (2) have the potential to induce tolerance rather than immunity, and (3) are as effective in individuals with depressed immune function as they are in healthy adults.