Search

BackgroundInfluenza causes substantial morbidity and mortality despite available treatments. Anecdotal reports suggest that plasma with high antibody titres to influenza might be of benefit in the treatment of severe influenza.MethodsIn this randomised, open-label, multicentre, phase 2 trial, 29 academic medical centres in the USA assessed the safety and efficacy of anti-influenza plasma with haemagglutination inhibition antibody titres of 1:80 or more to the infecting strain. Hospitalised children and adults (including pregnant women) with severe influenza A or B (defined as the presence of hypoxia or tachypnoea) were randomly assigned to receive either two units (or paediatric equivalent) of anti-influenza plasma plus standard care, versus standard care alone, and were followed up for 28 days. The primary endpoint was time to normalisation of patients' respiratory status (respiratory rate of ≤20 breaths per min for adults or age-defined thresholds of 20-38 breaths per min for children) and a room air oxygen saturation of 93% or more. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01052480.FindingsBetween Jan 13, 2011, and March 2, 2015, 113 participants were screened for eligibility and 98 were randomly assigned from 20 out of 29 participating sites. Of the participants with confirmed influenza (by PCR), 28 (67%) of 42 in the plasma plus standard care group normalised their respiratory status by day 28 compared with 24 (53%) of 45 participants on standard care alone (p=0·069). The hazard ratio (HR) comparing plasma plus standard care with standard care alone was 1·71 (95% CI 0·96-3·06). Six participants died, one (2%) from the plasma plus standard care group and five (10%) from the standard care group (HR 0·19 [95% CI 0·02-1·65], p=0·093). Participants in the plasma plus standard care group had non-significant reductions in days in hospital (median 6 days [IQR 4-16] vs 11 days [5-25], p=0·13) and days on mechanical ventilation (median 0 days [IQR 0-6] vs 3 days [0-14], p=0·14). Fewer plasma plus standard care participants had serious adverse events compared with standard care alone recipients (nine [20%] of 46 vs 20 [38%] of 52, p=0·041), the most frequent of which were acute respiratory distress syndrome (one [2%] vs two [4%] patients) and stroke (one [2%] vs two [4%] patients).InterpretationAlthough there was no significant effect of plasma treatment on the primary endpoint, the treatment seemed safe and well tolerated. A phase 3 randomised trial is now underway to further assess this intervention.FundingNational Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, US National Institutes of Health.

Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) was initially identified in September 2012 when a patient in Saudi Arabia with a severe, acute respiratory infection and acute renal failure died (1). [...]

Summary Background: Influenza causes significant morbidity and mortality despite currently available treatments. Anecdotal reports suggest plasma with high antibody titers towards influenza may be of benefit in the treatment of severe influenza. Methods: We conducted a randomized, open-label, multicenter phase 2 trial at 29 academic medical centers in the United States to assess the safety and efficacy of anti-influenza plasma with hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) antibody titers of ≥ 1:80 to the infecting strain. Hospitalized children and adults (including pregnant women) with severe influenza A or B (defined as hypoxia or tachypnea) were randomly assigned to receive either 2 units (or pediatric equivalent) of anti-influenza plasma plus standard care (P+S), versus standard care alone (S), and were followed for 28 days. The primary endpoint was time to normalization of patients’ respiratory status (respiratory rate of ≤ 20 for adults or age defined thresholds of 20–38 for children), and a room air saturation of oxygen ≥ 93%. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01052480 Findings: Between January 13, 2011 and March 2, 2015, 113 participants were screened, and 98 were randomized. Of the participants with confirmed influenza, 28 of 42 (67%) of P+S participants normalized their respiratory status by Day 28, as compared to 24 of 45 (53%) of S participants (p=0·069). The estimated hazard ratio comparing P+S to S was 1·71 (95% CI: 0·96 to 3·06). Six participants died, 1 (2%) and 5 (10%) from the P+S and S arms respectively (p=0·093). P+S participants had non-significant reductions in days in hospital (median 6 vs. 11 days, p=0·13) and days on mechanical ventilation (median 0 vs. 3 days, p=0·14), and significantly improved clinical status at Day 7 (p=0·020). Fewer P+S participants experienced SAEs compared to S recipients (20% vs. 38%, p= 0·041), the most frequent of which were acute respiratory distress syndrome (1 [2%] vs 2 [4%]) and stroke (1 [2%] vs 2 [4%]). Interpretation Results from this Phase II randomized trial of immune plasma for the treatment of severe influenza provides support for a possible benefit of immunotherapy across the primary and secondary endpoints. A Phase III randomized trial is now underway to further evaluate this intervention.

A candidate vaccine (D1ME-VRP) expressing dengue virus type 1 premembrane and envelope proteins in a Venezuelan equine encephalitis (VEE) virus replicon particle (VRP) system was constructed and tested in conjunction with a plasmid DNA vaccine (D1ME-DNA) expressing identical dengue virus sequences. Cynomolgus macaques were vaccinated with three doses of DNA (DDD), three doses of VRP (VVV group), or a heterologous DNA prime-VRP boost regimen (DDV) using two doses of DNA vaccine and a third dose of VRP vaccine. Four weeks after the final immunization, the DDV group produced the highest dengue virus type 1-specific immunoglobulin G antibody responses and virus-neutralizing antibody titers. Moderate T-cell responses were demonstrated only in DDD- and DDV-vaccinated animals. When vaccinated animals were challenged with live virus, all vaccination regimens showed significant protection from viremia. DDV-immunized animals were completely protected from viremia (mean time of viremia = 0 days), whereas DDD- and VVV-vaccinated animals had mean times of viremia of 0.66 and 0.75 day, respectively, compared to 6.33 days for the control group of animals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dengue is the most important arbovirus worldwide and is the virus that causes dengue fever and the more severe dengue hemorrhagic fever. There are four serotypes of dengue with each possessing the ability to cause disease. Developing a preventive vaccine is the most efficient and effective way to prevent these diseases, and because immunity to one serotype does not protect against the other serotypes, a vaccine must provide tetravalent protection. We used DNA immunization as a platform to develop a tetravalent vaccine. In this chapter, we describe the laboratory, regulatory, and clinical methodology for evaluating a candidate tetravalent vaccine in a Phase 1 clinical trial.

The development of needle-free injection originally stemmed from a general apprehension of needle injections, disease transmission by accidental needle-sticks, and the need for effective mass immunization. Naked DNA vaccines, as attractive and universal as they appear, have not produced robust immune responses in test systems. However, proof of principle for DNA vaccines has been validated with a number of vaccine candidates in a variety of test systems, and the concept of DNA vaccines as a generic platform for vaccines still remains viable and attractive. Many avenues are being explored to enhance the immunogenicity of DNA vaccines. The easiest and most straightforward approach that can be quickly transitioned to a clinical trial setting is vaccine delivery by a needle-free jet injector. This approach has shown much potential in a number of cases and should become the lead method for enhancing DNA vaccines. This approach requires no additional development, and with an expanding market and willingness from jet injector manufacturers to produce prefilled syringes, the technique should become feasible for larger phase II/phase III trials.