Clinical and virological responses to a broad-spectrum human monoclonal antibody in an influenza virus challenge study

Monoclonal Antibodies and Hyperimmune Immunoglobulins in the Next Pandemic

Pandemics are highly unpredictable events that are generally caused by novel viruses. There is a high likelihood that such novel pathogens belong to entirely novel viral families for which no targeted small-molecule antivirals exist. In addition, small-molecule antivirals often have pharmacokinetic properties that make them contraindicated for the frail patients who are often the most susceptible to a novel virus. Passive immunotherapies-available from the first convalescent patients-can then play a key role in controlling pandemics. Convalescent plasma is immediately available, but if manufacturers have fast platforms to generate marketable drugs, other forms of passive antibody treatment can be produced. In this chapter, we will review the technological platforms for generating monoclonal antibodies and hyperimmune immunoglobulins, the current experience on their use for treatment of COVID-19, and the pipeline for pandemic candidates.

Modeling the transmission mitigation impact of testing for infectious diseases

A fundamental question of any program focused on the testing and timely diagnosis of a communicable disease is its effectiveness in reducing transmission. Here, we introduce testing effectiveness (TE)-the fraction by which testing and post-diagnosis isolation reduce transmission at the population scale-and a model that incorporates test specifications and usage, within-host pathogen dynamics, and human behaviors to estimate TE. Using TE to guide recommendations, we show that today's rapid diagnostics should be used immediately upon symptom onset to control influenza A and respiratory syncytial virus but delayed by up to two days to control omicron-era severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Furthermore, while rapid tests are superior to reverse transcription quantitative polymerase chain reaction (RT-qPCR) to control founder-strain SARS-CoV-2, omicron-era changes in viral kinetics and rapid test sensitivity cause a reversal, with higher TE for RT-qPCR despite longer turnaround times. Last, we illustrate the model's flexibility by quantifying trade-offs in the use of post-diagnosis testing to shorten isolation times.

Anti-idiotype isolation of a broad and potent influenza A virus-neutralizing human antibody

The VH6-1 class of antibodies includes some of the broadest and most potent antibodies that neutralize influenza A virus. Here, we elicit and isolate anti-idiotype antibodies against germline versions of VH6-1 antibodies, use these to sort human leukocytes, and isolate a new VH6-1-class member, antibody L5A7, which potently neutralized diverse group 1 and group 2 influenza A strains. While its heavy chain derived from the canonical IGHV6-1 heavy chain gene used by the class, L5A7 utilized a light chain gene, IGKV1-9, which had not been previously observed in other VH6-1-class antibodies. The cryo-EM structure of L5A7 in complex with Indonesia 2005 hemagglutinin revealed a nearly identical binding mode to other VH6-1-class members. The structure of L5A7 bound to the isolating anti-idiotype antibody, 28H6E11, revealed a shared surface for binding anti-idiotype and hemagglutinin that included two critical L5A7 regions: an FG motif in the third heavy chain-complementary determining region (CDR H3) and the CDR L1 loop. Surprisingly, the chemistries of L5A7 interactions with hemagglutinin and with anti-idiotype were substantially different. Overall, we demonstrate anti-idiotype-based isolation of a broad and potent influenza A virus-neutralizing antibody, revealing that anti-idiotypic selection of antibodies can involve features other than chemical mimicry of the target antigen.

Passive immunotherapies for the next influenza pandemic

Influenzavirus is among the most relevant candidates for a next pandemic. We review here the phylogeny of former influenza pandemics, and discuss candidate lineages. After briefly reviewing the other existing antiviral options, we discuss in detail the evidences supporting the efficacy of passive immunotherapies against influenzavirus, with a focus on convalescent plasma.

A phase 1 study in healthy volunteers to investigate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of VIR-2482: a monoclonal antibody for the prevention of severe influenza A illness

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of VIR-2482 in healthy adult subjects. A phase 1, first-in-human, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-escalation study was conducted. One hundred participants were allocated to four cohorts (60 mg, 300 mg, 1,200 mg, and 1,800 mg). In each cohort, participants were randomized in a 4:1 ratio (active:placebo) to receive either VIR-2482 or volume-matched placebo by gluteal intramuscular injection. Participants remained at the investigative site under observation for 48 h, and adverse events (AEs) were collected for 56 days. PK and immunogenicity were measured up to 52 weeks post-dose. VIR-2482 was well tolerated at all doses studied. The overall incidence of AEs was comparable between VIR-2482 (68.8%) and placebo (85.0%). Nineteen VIR-2482 (23.8%) and six placebo (30.0%) recipients had Grade 1 or 2 AEs that were considered to be related to the study intervention. There were no treatment-related serious AEs. Injection-site reactions (ISRs) were reported in six (7.5%) VIR-2482 recipients, while no such reactions were reported among the placebo recipients. All ISRs were Grade 1, and there was no relationship with the dose. Median VIR-2482 serum elimination half-life ranged from 56.7 to 70.6 days across cohorts. The serum area under the curve and Cmax were dose-proportional. Nasopharyngeal VIR-2482 concentrations were approximately 2%-5% of serum levels and were less than dose-proportional. The incidence of immunogenicity across all cohorts was 1.3%. Overall, the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic profile of VIR-2482 at doses up to 1,800 mg supported its further investigation as a long-acting antibody for the prevention of influenza A illness. This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT04033406.

Modeling the Transmission Mitigation Impact of Testing for Infectious Diseases

A fundamental question of any program focused on the testing and timely diagnosis of a communicable disease is its effectiveness in reducing transmission. Here, we introduce testing effectiveness (TE)-the fraction by which testing and post-diagnosis isolation reduce transmission at the population scale-and a model that incorporates test specifications and usage, within-host pathogen dynamics, and human behaviors to estimate TE. Using TE to guide recommendations, we show that today's rapid diagnostics should be used immediately upon symptom onset to control influenza A and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), but delayed by up to 2d to control omicron-era SARS-CoV-2. Furthermore, while rapid tests are superior to RT-qPCR for control of founder-strain SARS-CoV-2, omicron-era changes in viral kinetics and rapid test sensitivity cause a reversal, with higher TE for RT-qPCR despite longer turnaround times. Finally, we illustrate the model's flexibility by quantifying tradeoffs in the use of post-diagnosis testing to shorten isolation times.

Broadly neutralizing antibodies to combat influenza virus infection

The diversified classification and continuous alteration of influenza viruses underscore for antivirals and vaccines that can counter a broad range of influenza subtypes. Hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) are two principle viral surface targets for broadly neutralizing antibodies. A series of monoclonal antibodies, targeting HA and NA, have been discovered and characterized with a wide range of neutralizing activity against influenza viruses. Clinical studies have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of some HA stem-targeting antibodies against influenza viruses. Broadly neutralizing antibodies (bnAbs) can serve as both prophylactic and therapeutic agents, as well as play a critical role in identifying antigens and epitopes for the development of universal vaccines. In this review, we described and summarized the latest discoveries and advancements of bnAbs against influenza viruses in both pre- and clinical development. Additionally, we assess whether bnAbs can serve as a viable alternative to vaccination against influenza. Finally, we discussed the rationale behind reverse vaccinology, a structure-guided universal vaccine design strategy that efficiently identifies candidate antigens and conserved epitopes that can be targeted by antibodies.

Antiviral Approaches against Influenza Virus

Preventing and controlling influenza virus infection remains a global public health challenge, as it causes seasonal epidemics to unexpected pandemics. These infections are responsible for high morbidity, mortality, and substantial economic impact. Vaccines are the prophylaxis mainstay in the fight against influenza. However, vaccination fails to confer complete protection due to inadequate vaccination coverages, vaccine shortages, and mismatches with circulating strains. Antivirals represent an important prophylactic and therapeutic measure to reduce influenza-associated morbidity and mortality, particularly in high-risk populations. Here, we review current FDA-approved influenza antivirals with their mechanisms of action, and different viral- and host-directed influenza antiviral approaches, including immunomodulatory interventions in clinical development. Furthermore, we also illustrate the potential utility of machine learning in developing next-generation antivirals against influenza.

Fighting the flu: a brief review on anti-influenza agents

The influenza virus causes one of the most prevalent and lethal infectious viral diseases of the respiratory system; the disease progression varies from acute self-limiting mild fever to disease chronicity and death. Although both the preventive and treatment measures have been vital in protecting humans against seasonal epidemics or sporadic pandemics, there are several challenges to curb the influenza virus such as limited or poor cross-protection against circulating virus strains, moderate protection in immune-compromised patients, and rapid emergence of resistance. Currently, there are four US-FDA-approved anti-influenza drugs to treat flu infection, viz. Rapivab, Relenza, Tamiflu, and Xofluza. These drugs are classified based on their mode of action against the viral replication cycle with the first three being Neuraminidase inhibitors, and the fourth one targeting the viral polymerase. The emergence of the drug-resistant strains of influenza, however, underscores the need for continuous innovation towards development and discovery of new anti-influenza agents with enhanced antiviral effects, greater safety, and improved tolerability. Here in this review, we highlighted commercially available antiviral agents besides those that are at different stages of development including under clinical trials, with a brief account of their antiviral mechanisms.

Influenza antivirals and their role in pandemic preparedness

Effective antivirals provide crucial benefits during the early phase of an influenza pandemic, when vaccines are still being developed and manufactured. Currently, two classes of viral protein-targeting drugs, neuraminidase inhibitors and polymerase inhibitors, are approved for influenza treatment and post-exposure prophylaxis. Resistance to both classes has been documented, highlighting the need to develop novel antiviral options that may include both viral and host-targeted inhibitors. Such efforts will form the basis of management of seasonal influenza infections and of strategic planning for future influenza pandemics. This review focuses on the two classes of approved antivirals, their drawbacks, and ongoing work to characterize novel agents or combination therapy approaches to address these shortcomings. The importance of these topics in the ongoing process of influenza pandemic planning is also discussed.

A Brief History of Human Challenge Studies (1900-2021) Emphasising the Virology, Regulatory and Ethical Requirements, Raison D'etre, Ethnography, Selection of Volunteers and Unit Design

Venetian quarantine 400 years ago was an important public health measure. Since 1900 this has been refined to include "challenge" or deliberate infection with pathogens be they viruses, bacteria, or parasites. Our focus is virology and ranges from the early experiments in Cuba with Yellow Fever Virus to the most widespread pathogen of our current times, COVID-19. The latter has so far caused over four million deaths worldwide and 190 million cases of the disease. Quarantine and challenge were also used to investigate the Spanish Influenza of 1918 which caused over 100 million deaths. We consider here the merits of the approach, that is the speeding up of knowledge in a practical sense leading to the more rapid licensing of vaccines and antimicrobials. At the core of quarantine and challenge initiatives is the design of the unit to allow safe confinement of the pathogen and protection of the staff. Most important though is the safety of volunteers. We can see now, as in 1900, that members of our society are prepared and willing to engage in these experiments for the public good. Our ethnology study, where the investigator observed the experiment from within the quarantine, gave us the first indication of changing attitudes amongst volunteers whilst in quarantine. These quarantine experiments, referred to as challenge studies, human infection studies, or "controlled human infection models" involve thousands of clinical samples taken over two to three weeks and can provide a wealth of immunological and molecular data on the infection itself and could allow the discovery of new targets for vaccines and therapeutics. The Yellow Fever studies from 121 years ago gave the impetus for development of a successful vaccine still used today whilst also uncovering the nature of the Yellow Fever agent, namely that it was a virus. We outline how carefully these experiments are approached and the necessity to have high quality units with self-contained air-flow along with extensive personal protective equipment for nursing and medical staff. Most important is the employment of highly trained scientific, medical and nursing staff. We face a future of emerging pathogens driven by the increasing global population, deforestation, climate change, antibiotic resistance and increased global travel. These emerging pathogens may be pathogens we currently are not aware of or have not caused outbreaks historically but could also be mutated forms of known pathogens including viruses such as influenza (H7N9, H5N1 etc.) and coronaviruses. This calls for challenge studies to be part of future pandemic preparedness as an additional tool to assist with the rapid development of broad-spectrum antimicrobials, immunomodulators and new vaccines.

A Phase 2 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of the Monoclonal Antibody MHAA4549A in Patients With Acute Uncomplicated Influenza A Infection

Background

MHAA4549A, a human monoclonal antibody targeting the influenza A hemagglutinin stalk, neutralizes influenza A virus in animal and human volunteer challenge studies. We investigated the safety and tolerability, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of MHAA4549A in outpatients with acute, uncomplicated influenza A infection.

Methods

This was a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of single intravenous (IV) doses of 3600 mg or 8400 mg of MHAA4549A or IV placebo in adult outpatients testing positive for influenza A. Patients were enrolled across 35 sites in 6 countries. Randomization and dosing occurred within ≤72 hours of symptom onset; the study duration was 14 weeks. The primary end point was the nature and frequency of adverse events (AEs). Secondary end points included median time to alleviation of all influenza symptoms, effects on nasopharyngeal viral load and duration of viral shedding, and MHAA4549A serum pharmacokinetics.

Results

Of 125 randomized patients, 124 received study treatment, with 99 confirmed positive for influenza A by central testing. The frequency of AEs between the MHAA4549A and placebo groups was similar; nausea was most common (8 patients; 6.5%). MHAA4549A serum exposure was confirmed in all MHAA4549A-treated patients and was dose-proportional. No hospitalizations or deaths occurred. Between the MHAA4549A and placebo groups, no statistically significant differences occurred in the median time to alleviation of all symptoms, nasopharyngeal viral load, or duration of viral shedding.

Conclusions

While MHAA4549A was safe and well tolerated with confirmed exposure, the antibody did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with acute uncomplicated influenza A infection.

The role of influenza A virus-induced hypercytokinemia

Influenza viruses are one of the leading causes of respiratory tract infections in humans and their newly emerging and re-emerging virus strains are responsible for seasonal epidemics and occasional pandemics, leading to a serious threat to global public health systems. The poor clinical outcome and pathogenesis during influenza virus infection in humans and animal models are often associated with elevated proinflammatory cytokines and chemokines production, which is also known as hypercytokinemia or "cytokine storm", that precedes acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) and often leads to death. Although we still do not fully understand the complex nature of cytokine storms, the use of immunomodulatory drugs is a promising approach for treating hypercytokinemia induced by an acute viral infection, including highly pathogenic avian influenza virus infection and Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19). This review aims to discuss the immune responses and cytokine storm pathology induced by influenza virus infection and also summarize alternative experimental strategies for treating hypercytokinemia caused by influenza virus.

Drug combination therapy for emerging viral diseases

Effective therapeutics to combat emerging viral infections are an unmet need. Historically, treatments for chronic viral infections with single drugs have not been successful, as exemplified by human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) and hepatitis C virus (HCV) infections. Combination therapy for these diseases has led to improved clinical outcomes with dramatic reductions in viral load, morbidity, and mortality. Drug combinations can enhance therapeutic efficacy through additive, and ideally synergistic, effects for emerging and re-emerging viruses, such as influenza, severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus (SARS-CoV), Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)-CoV, Ebola, Zika, and SARS-coronavirus 2 (CoV-2). Although novel drug development through traditional pipelines remains a priority, in the interim, effective synergistic drug candidates could be rapidly identified by drug-repurposing screens, facilitating accelerated paths to clinical testing and potential emergency use authorizations.

Safety and Efficacy of CR6261 in an Influenza A H1N1 Healthy Human Challenge Model

BACKGROUND

It is imperative to identify new targets for improved vaccines and therapeutics against influenza and one such target is the relatively conserved stalk region of the influenza A hemagglutinin (HA) surface protein.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, Phase II placebo-controlled trial of a monoclonal antibody that targets the HA stalk (CR6261) in a H1N1pdm09 healthy volunteer human challenge model. A single 50mg/kg dose of CR6261 was infused 24 hours after challenge and the primary efficacy outcome was area under the curve of viral RNA detection over time.

RESULTS

Ninety-one healthy volunteers were randomized and underwent influenza challenge; 49 received CR6261 and 42 placebo. CR6261 had no statistically significant effect on AUC (AUC 48.56 log (copies/mL) x days, IQR 202 vs. AUC 25.53 log (copies/mL) x days, IQR 155), P=0.315), and no clinically significant effect on influenza disease measures including number of symptoms, duration of symptoms, or FLU-PRO scores. Preexisting anti-NA antibody titers were most predictive of reduced influenza disease. CR6261 reached a mean peak serum concentration of 1x10 6 ng/ml 15 minutes after infusion, and a mean peak of 5.97x10 2 ng/ml in the nasal mucosa 2-3 days after infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study suggest that a monoclonal anti-stalk approach to prevent or treat influenza infection may be limited in efficacy. Future approaches should consider including and evaluating anti-stalk antibodies as part of a multi-faceted strategy rather than as a standalone therapeutic.