| 1. |
- Peeters, Mathieu, et al.
(författare)
-
Safety and immunogenicity of an AS03-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pmd09 vaccine administered simultaneously or sequentially with a seasonal trivalent vaccine in adults 61 years or older : Data from two multicentre randomised trials
- 2012
-
Ingår i: Vaccine. - : Elsevier BV. - 0264-410X .- 1873-2518. ; 30:45, s. 6483-6491
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- During the 2009-2010 Northern Hemisphere influenza season, both seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines were expected to be administered to elderly people, which is an important target group for influenza vaccination. Two multicentre randomised clinical studies were conducted in participants aged >= 61 years to assess the immunogenicity and reactogenicity following vaccination with two doses of an AS03-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pmd09 vaccine when either sequentially administered (21 days before first dose [N = 73] or 21 days after second dose [N = 72]) or co-administered (first dose [N = 84] or second dose [N = 84]) with a licensed trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine (TIV). Overall, 313 participants from 2 centres in Sweden (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00968890) and 6 centres in Germany (NCT00971425) were randomised to one of the four treatment groups. The AS03-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pmd09 vaccine elicited a good immune response against A(H1N1)pmd09-like virus in all treatment groups after the first and second dose, meeting and exceeding the European licensing criteria for pandemic influenza vaccines. After one dose of the AS03-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pmd09 vaccine, haemagglutination inhibition seroconversion rates ranged from 85% (95% confidence interval: 74-93%) to 93% (85-97%), seroprotection rates from 87% (76-94%) to 96% (90-99%) and geometric mean fold rise from 15 (11-19) to 20 (16-25). The haemagglutination inhibition immune responses to the AS03-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pmd09 vaccine seemed lower when TIV was administered 3 weeks before, while immune responses to TIV seemed not affected by either vaccination schedule. Solicited symptoms were more frequently reported following administration of the AS03-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pmd09 vaccine compared to TIV, but these were mainly mild to moderate in intensity and transient in the four treatment groups. These results suggest that sequential or co-administration of the AS03-adjuvanted A(H1N1)pmd09 vaccine and TIV induced a good immune response to both vaccines and had a clinically acceptable safety profile in people aged >= 61 years.
|
|
| 2. |
- Rumke, Hans C., et al.
(författare)
-
Selection of an adjuvant for seasonal influenza vaccine in elderly people : modelling immunogenicity from a randomized trial
- 2013
-
Ingår i: BMC Infectious Diseases. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1471-2334. ; 13, s. 348-
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Improved influenza vaccines are needed to reduce influenza-associated complications in older adults. The aim of this study was to identify the optimal formulation of adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine for use in elderly people. Methods: This observer-blind, randomized study assessed the optimal formulation of adjuvanted seasonal influenza vaccine based on immunogenicity and safety in participants aged >= 65 years. Participants were randomized (similar to 200 per group) to receive one dose of non-adjuvanted vaccine or one of eight formulations of vaccine formulated with a squalene and tocopherol oil-in-water emulsion-based Adjuvant System (AS03(C), AS03(B) or AS03(A), with 2.97, 5.93 and 11.86 mg tocopherol, respectively) together with the immunostimulant monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL, doses of 0, 25 or 50 mg). Hemagglutination-inhibition (HI) antibody responses and T-cell responses were assessed on Day 0 and 21 days post-vaccination. The ratio of HI-based geometric mean titers in adjuvanted versus non-adjuvanted vaccine groups were calculated and the lower limit of the 90% confidence interval was transformed into a desirability index (a value between 0 and 1) in an experimental domain for each vaccine strain, and plotted in relation to the AS03 and MPL dose combination in the formulation. This model was used to assess the optimal formulation based on HI antibody titers. Reactogenicity and safety were also assessed. The immunogenicity and safety analyses were used to evaluate the optimal formulation of adjuvanted vaccine. Results: In the HI antibody-based model, an AS03 dose-response was evident; responses against the A/H1N1 and A/H3N2 strains were higher for all adjuvanted formulations versus non-adjuvanted vaccine, and for the AS03(A)-MPL25, AS03(B)-MPL25 and AS03(B)-MPL50 formulations against the B strain. Modelling using more stringent criteria (post hoc) showed a clear dose-range effect for the AS03 component against all strains, whereas MPL showed a limited effect. Higher T-cell responses for adjuvanted versus non-adjuvanted vaccine were observed for all except two formulations (AS03(C) and AS03(B)-MPL25). Reactogenicity increased with increasing AS03 dosage, and with MPL. No safety concerns were raised. Conclusions: Five formulations containing AS03(A) or AS03(B) were identified as potential candidates to improve immune responses to influenza vaccination; AS03(B) without MPL showed the best balance between improved immunogenicity and acceptable reactogenicity.
|
|
