A randomized, open-labelled, non-inferiority phase 4 clinical trial to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of the live, attenuated, oral rotavirus vaccine, ROTAVAC® in comparison with a licensed rotavirus vaccine in healthy infants

Correlates of immune protection against human rotaviruses: natural infection and vaccination

Species A rotaviruses are the leading viral cause of acute gastroenteritis in children under 5 years of age worldwide. Despite progress in the characterization of the pathogenesis and immunology of rotavirus-induced gastroenteritis, correlates of protection (CoPs) in the course of either natural infection or vaccine-induced immunity are not fully understood. There are numerous factors such as serological responses (IgA and IgG), the presence of maternal antibodies (Abs) in breast milk, changes in the intestinal microbiome, and rotavirus structural and non-structural proteins that contribute to the outcome of the CoP. Indeed, while an intestinal IgA response and its surrogate, the serum IgA level, are suggested as the principal CoPs for oral rotavirus vaccines, the IgG level is more likely to be a CoP for parenteral non-replicating rotavirus vaccines. Integrating clinical and immunological data will be instrumental in improving rotavirus vaccine efficacy, especially in low- and middle-income countries, where vaccine efficacy is significantly lower than in high-income countries. Further knowledge on CoPs against rotavirus disease will be helpful for next-generation vaccine development. Herein, available data and literature on interacting components and proposed CoPs against human rotavirus disease are reviewed, and limitations and gaps in our knowledge in this area are discussed.

Phase III randomized clinical studies to evaluate the immunogenicity, lot-to-lot consistency, and safety of ROTAVAC® liquid formulations (ROTAVAC 5C & 5D) and non-inferiority comparisons with licensed ROTAVAC® (frozen formulation) in healthy infants

The WHO pre-qualified rotavirus vaccine, ROTAVAC®, is derived naturally from the neonatal 116E rotavirus strain, and stored at -20°C. As refrigerator storage is preferable, immunogenicity and safety of liquid formulations kept at 2-8°C, having excipients to stabilize the rotavirus, with or without buffers, were compared with ROTAVAC® in different clinical studies. Study-1, the pivotal trial for this entire product development work, was a randomized, single-blind trial with two operationally seamless phases: (i) an exploratory phase involving 675 infants in which two formulations, ROTAVAC 5C (LnHRV-1.5 mL and LnHRV-2.0 mL) containing buffer and excipients to stabilize the virus against gastric acidity and temperature, were compared with ROTAVAC®. As the immune response of ROTAVAC 5C (LnHRV-2.0 mL) was non-inferior to ROTAVAC®, it was selected for (ii) confirmatory phase, involving 1,302 infants randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive three lots of LnHRV-2.0 mL, or ROTAVAC®. Primary objectives were the evaluation of non-inferiority and lot-to-lot consistency. The secondary objectives were to assess the safety and interference with the concomitant pentavalent vaccine. As it was separately established that buffers are not required for ROTAVAC®, in Study-2, the safety and immunogenicity of ROTAVAC 5D® (with excipients) were compared with ROTAVAC® and lot-to-lot consistency was assessed in another study. All lots elicited consistent immune responses, did not interfere with UIP vaccines, and had reactogenicity similar to ROTAVAC®. ROTAVAC 5C and ROTAVAC 5D® were immunogenic and well tolerated as ROTAVAC®. ROTAVAC 5D® had comparable immunogenicity and safety profiles with ROTAVAC® and can be stored at 2-8°C, leading to WHO pre-qualification.Clinical Trials Registration: Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI): CTRI/2015/02/005577CTRI/2016/11/007481 and CTRI/2019/03/017934.

Vaccines development in India: advances, regulation, and challenges

One of the most significant medical advancements in human history is the development of vaccines. Progress in vaccine development has always been greatly influenced by scientific human innovation. The main objective of vaccine development would be to acquire sufficient evidence of vaccine effectiveness, immunogenicity, safety, and/or quality to support requests for marketing approval. Vaccines are biological products that enhance the body's defenses against infectious diseases. From the first smallpox vaccine to the latest notable coronavirus disease 2019 nasal vaccine, India has come a long way. The development of numerous vaccines, driven by scientific innovation and advancement, combined with researcher's knowledge, has helped to reduce the global burden of disease and mortality rates. The Drugs and Cosmetics Rules of 1945 and the New Drugs and Clinical Trials Rules of 2019 specify the requirements and guidelines for CMC (chemistry, manufacturing, and controls) for all manufactured and imported vaccines, including those against coronavirus infections. This article provides an overview of the regulation pertaining to the development process, registration, and approval procedures for vaccines, particularly in India, along with their brief history.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus is a common cause of diarrhoea, diarrhoea-related hospital admissions, and diarrhoea-related deaths worldwide. Rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline), RotaTeq (Merck), and, more recently, Rotasiil (Serum Institute of India Ltd.), and Rotavac (Bharat Biotech Ltd.).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 30 November 2020, we searched PubMed, the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science & Humanities. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies, and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in children that compared rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO with either placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risk of bias. One author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analyses by under-five country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 228,233 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed Rotarix, 15 trials RotaTeq (88,934 participants), five trials Rotasiil (11,753 participants), and four trials Rotavac (8432 participants). Rotarix Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 93% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (14,976 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 52% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (3874 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (31,671 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 36% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (26,479 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 58% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (15,882 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 90% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (18,145 participants, 6 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 51% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (6269 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).   In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 77% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (28,834 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 26% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (23,317 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (13,768 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (2764 participants, 1 trial; high-certainty evidence). RotaTeq Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 97% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6775 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 96% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6744 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  We did not identify RotaTeq studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low- or medium-mortality countries. Rotasiil Rotasiil has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality. Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 48% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Rotavac Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality.  Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence); no Rotavac studies have reported on severe all-cause diarrhoea at two-years follow-up. Safety No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) was detected with Rotarix (103,714 participants, 31 trials; high-certainty evidence), RotaTeq (82,502 participants, 14 trials; moderate to high-certainty evidence), Rotasiil (11,646 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), or Rotavac (8210 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Deaths were infrequent and the analysis had insufficient evidence to show an effect on all-cause mortality. Intussusception was rare.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotasiil, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. The relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, but more episodes are prevented in high-mortality settings as the baseline risk is higher. In high-mortality countries some results suggest lower efficacy in the second year. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events, including intussusception, from any of the prequalified rotavirus vaccines.

Monoreassortant rotaviruses of multiple G types are differentially neutralized by sera from infants vaccinated with ROTARIX® and RotaTeq®

Rotavirus is a leading cause of pediatric diarrheal mortality. The rotavirus outer capsid consists of VP7 and VP4 proteins, which respectively determine viral G and P type and are primary targets of neutralizing antibodies. To elucidate VP7-specific neutralizing antibody responses, we engineered monoreassortant rotaviruses each containing a human VP7 segment from a sequenced clinical specimen or a vaccine strain in an identical genetic background. We quantified replication and neutralization of engineered viruses using sera from infants vaccinated with monovalent ROTARIX® or multivalent RotaTeq® vaccines. Immunization with RotaTeq® induced broader neutralizing antibody responses than ROTARIX®. Inclusion of a single dose of RotaTeq® in the schedule enhanced G-type neutralization breadth of vaccinated infant sera. Cell type-specific differences in infectivity, replication, and neutralization were detected for some monoreassortant viruses. These findings suggest that rotavirus VP7, independent of VP4, can contribute to cell tropism and the breadth of vaccine-elicited neutralizing antibody responses.

A phase III randomized, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial comparing liquid and lyophilized formulations of oral live attenuated human rotavirus vaccine (HRV) in Indian infants

The human rotavirus vaccine (HRV; Rotarix, GSK) is available as liquid (Liq) and lyophilized (Lyo) formulations, but only Lyo HRV is licensed in India. In this phase III, randomized, open-label trial (NCT02141204), healthy Indian infants aged 6–10 weeks received 2 doses (1 month apart) of either Liq HRV or Lyo HRV. Non-inferiority of Liq HRV compared to Lyo HRV was assessed in terms of geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) of anti-RV immunoglobulin A (IgA), 1-month post-second dose (primary objective). Reactogenicity/safety were also evaluated. Seroconversion was defined as anti-RV IgA antibody concentration ≥20 units [U]/mL in initially seronegative infants (anti-RV IgA antibody concentration <20 U/mL) or ≥2-fold increase compared with pre-vaccination concentration in initially seropositive infants. Of the 451 enrolled infants, 381 (189 in Liq HRV and 192 in Lyo HRV group) were included in the per-protocol set. The GMC ratio (Liq HRV/Lyo HRV) was 0.93 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.65–1.34), with the lower limit of the 95% CI reaching ≥0.5, the pre-specified statistical margin for non-inferiority. In the Liq HRV and Lyo HRV groups, 42.9% and 44.3% (baseline) and 71.4% and 73.4% (1-month post-second dose) of infants had anti-RV IgA antibody concentration ≥20 U/mL, and overall seroconversion rates were 54.5% and 50.0%. Incidences of solicited and unsolicited adverse events were similar between groups and no vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. Liq HRV was non-inferior to Lyo HRV in terms of antibody GMCs and showed similar reactogenicity/safety profiles, supporting the use of Liq HRV in Indian infants.

What is the context?

Rotavirus is the most common cause of acute gastronenteritis and contributes to the high number of hospitalizations and deaths in young children worldwide.

Vaccination against rotavirus has led to a significant decrease in rotavirus-related infections.

The human rotavirus vaccine Rotarix (GSK) is currently used as a liquid or lyophilized formulation.

In clinical trials conducted in European and North American infants, the liquid vaccine showed ability to induce immune response and safety comparable to the lyophilized formulation.

Only the lyophilized vaccine is currently marketed in india.

What is new?

We compared the 2-dose liquid and lyophilized human rotavirus vaccines in indian infants in a phase III clinical trial:

The ability to induce immune response for thw liquid formulation was not inferior to that observed for the lyophilized vaccine.

The safety profiles of the 2 formulations were comparable.

Why is this important?

This study shows that the liquid human rotavirus vaccine can be administrated to infants from india.

Safety and immunogenicity of two formulations of rotavirus vaccine in Vietnamese infants

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

ROTAVIN-M1® (licensed, frozen vaccine) and ROTAVIN (second-generation, liquid candidate vaccine) are two rotavirus vaccine formulations developed from a live attenuated G1P8 (KH0118) strain by Center for Research and Production of Vaccines and Biologicals (POLYVAC), Vietnam. This study compared the safety and immunogenicity of these two formulations.

METHODS

A Phase 3, randomized, partially double-blinded, active-controlled study was conducted in healthy infants aged 60-91 days in Vietnam. Infants received two doses of ROTAVIN or ROTAVIN-M1 in a ratio of 2:1 with an interval of 8 weeks. Solicited reactions were collected for 7 days after each vaccination. Blood samples were collected pre-vaccination and 4 weeks after the second vaccination in a subset of infants. Non-inferiority criteria required that the lower bound of 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the post-vaccination anti-rotavirus IgA GMC (Geometric Mean Concentration) ratio of ROTAVIN/ROTAVIN-M1 should be >0.5. A co-primary objective was to compare the safety of the two vaccines in terms of solicited reactions.

RESULTS

A total of 825 infants were enrolled. The post-vaccination GMC was 48.25 (95% CI: 40.59, 57.37) in the ROTAVIN group and 35.04 (95% CI: 27.34, 44.91) in the ROTAVIN-M1 group with an IgA GMC ratio of 1.38 (95% CI: 1.02, 1.86) thus meeting the pre-set criteria for non-inferiority. A total of 605 solicited reactions were reported in 297 (36.0%) participants with 35.4% in the ROTAVIN group and 37.2% in the ROTAVIN-M1 group. There were no cases of intussusception or death reported in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the data generated, it can be concluded that ROTAVIN is immunologically non-inferior and has similar safety profile to ROTAVIN-M1 when administered to infants in a two-dose schedule. Therefore, it can be considered as a more suitable option for programmatic use to prevent rotavirus diarrhoea in Vietnam and the Mekong region.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03703336, October 11, 2018.

Immunogenicity and safety of two monovalent rotavirus vaccines, ROTAVAC® and ROTAVAC 5D® in Zambian infants

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

ROTAVAC® (frozen formulation stored at -20 °C) and ROTAVAC 5D® (liquid formulation stable at 2-8 °C) are rotavirus vaccines derived from the 116E human neonatal rotavirus strain, developed and licensed in India. This study evaluated and compared the safety and immunogenicity of these vaccines in an infant population in Zambia.

METHODS

We conducted a phase 2b, open-label, randomized, controlled trial wherein 450 infants 6 to 8 weeks of age were randomized equally to receive three doses of ROTAVAC or ROTAVAC 5D, or two doses of ROTARIX®. Study vaccines were administered concomitantly with routine immunizations. Blood samples were collected pre-vaccination and 28 days after the last dose. Serum anti-rotavirus IgA antibodies were measured by ELISA, with WC3 and 89-12 rotavirus strains as viral lysates in the assays. The primary analysis was to assess non-inferiority of ROTAVAC 5D to ROTAVAC in terms of the geometric mean concentration (GMC) of serum IgA (WC3) antibodies. Seroresponse and seropositivity were also determined. Safety was evaluated as occurrence of immediate, solicited, unsolicited, and serious adverse events after each dose.

RESULTS

The study evaluated 388 infants in the per-protocol population. All three vaccines were well tolerated and immunogenic. The post-vaccination GMCs were 14.0 U/mL (95% CI: 10.4, 18.8) and 18.1 U/mL (95% CI: 13.7, 24.0) for the ROTAVAC and ROTAVAC 5D groups, respectively, yielding a ratio of 1.3 (95% CI: 0.9, 1.9), thus meeting the pre-set non-inferiority criteria. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events were similar across all study arms. No death or intussusception case was reported during study period.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Zambian infants, both ROTAVAC and ROTAVAC 5D were well tolerated and the immunogenicity of ROTAVAC 5D was non-inferior to that of ROTAVAC. These results are consistent with those observed in licensure trials in India and support use of these vaccines across wider geographical areas.

Implementation of the World Health Organization recommendation on the use of rotavirus vaccine without age restriction by African countries

The World Health Organization (WHO) recommended the worldwide use of rotavirus vaccines initially in 2007 and 2009 applying a strict age restriction criterion due to the potential for age-related association with increased risk of intussusception in infants. The restriction was relaxed in the 2013 after detailed review of robust safety data generated in post-marketing surveillance studies. We assessed the status of the implementation of the 2013 recommendation to remove age restriction in the WHO African region (AFR). Of the approximately 75% (35/47) of countries that had introduced the vaccine by 2018, only 43% (15/35) removed age restriction, exclusively from South and East sub-region (78%, 14/18). Avoiding confusion at the health facilities and financial constraints particularly resources required for re-training the health workers, use of vaccine off-label were cited as the main reasons for not implementing the 2013 WHO recommendation on age restriction removal. The 2013 WHO recommendation has not been fully implemented by African countries, suggesting the need for technical advisory bodies to further guide the countries, continue monitoring the implementation status and impact on the rotavirus vaccine coverage and intussusception in the Africa region.

Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, BBV152: a double-blind, randomised, phase 1 trial

BACKGROUND

To mitigate the effects of COVID-19, a vaccine is urgently needed. BBV152 is a whole-virion inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine formulated with a toll-like receptor 7/8 agonist molecule adsorbed to alum (Algel-IMDG) or alum (Algel).

METHODS

We did a double-blind, multicentre, randomised, controlled phase 1 trial to assess the safety and immunogenicity of BBV152 at 11 hospitals across India. Healthy adults aged 18-55 years who were deemed healthy by the investigator were eligible. Individuals with positive SARS-CoV-2 nucleic acid and/or serology tests were excluded. Participants were randomly assigned to receive either one of three vaccine formulations (3 μg with Algel-IMDG, 6 μg with Algel-IMDG, or 6 μg with Algel) or an Algel only control vaccine group. Block randomisation was done with a web response platform. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment group allocation. Two intramuscular doses of vaccines were administered on day 0 (the day of randomisation) and day 14. Primary outcomes were solicited local and systemic reactogenicity events at 2 h and 7 days after vaccination and throughout the full study duration, including serious adverse events. Secondary outcome was seroconversion (at least four-fold increase from baseline) based on wild-type virus neutralisation. Cell-mediated responses were evaluated by intracellular staining and ELISpot. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04471519).

FINDINGS

Between July 13 and 30, 2020, 827 participants were screened, of whom 375 were enrolled. Among the enrolled participants, 100 each were randomly assigned to the three vaccine groups, and 75 were randomly assigned to the control group (Algel only). After both doses, solicited local and systemic adverse reactions were reported by 17 (17%; 95% CI 10·5-26·1) participants in the 3 μg with Algel-IMDG group, 21 (21%; 13·8-30·5) in the 6 μg with Algel-IMDG group, 14 (14%; 8·1-22·7) in the 6 μg with Algel group, and ten (10%; 6·9-23·6) in the Algel-only group. The most common solicited adverse events were injection site pain (17 [5%] of 375 participants), headache (13 [3%]), fatigue (11 [3%]), fever (nine [2%]), and nausea or vomiting (seven [2%]). All solicited adverse events were mild (43 [69%] of 62) or moderate (19 [31%]) and were more frequent after the first dose. One serious adverse event of viral pneumonitis was reported in the 6 μg with Algel group, unrelated to the vaccine. Seroconversion rates (%) were 87·9, 91·9, and 82·8 in the 3 μg with Algel-IMDG, 6 μg with Algel-IMDG, and 6 μg with Algel groups, respectively. CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T-cell responses were detected in a subset of 16 participants from both Algel-IMDG groups.

INTERPRETATION

BBV152 led to tolerable safety outcomes and enhanced immune responses. Both Algel-IMDG formulations were selected for phase 2 immunogenicity trials. Further efficacy trials are warranted.

FUNDING

Bharat Biotech International.

Vaccines against gastroenteritis, current progress and challenges

Enteric viral and bacterial infections continue to be a leading cause of mortality and morbidity in young children in low-income and middle-income countries, the elderly, and immunocompromised individuals. Vaccines are considered an effective and practical preventive approach against the predominantly fecal-to-oral transmitted gastroenteritis particularly in the resource-limited countries or regions where implementation of sanitation systems and supply of safe drinking water are not quickly achievable. While vaccines are available for a few enteric pathogens including rotavirus and cholera, there are no vaccines licensed for many other enteric viral and bacterial pathogens. Challenges in enteric vaccine development include immunological heterogeneity among pathogen strains or isolates, a lack of animal challenge models to evaluate vaccine candidacy, undefined host immune correlates to protection, and a low protective efficacy among young children in endemic regions. In this article, we briefly updated the progress and challenges in vaccines and vaccine development for the leading enteric viral and bacterial pathogens including rotavirus, human calicivirus, Shigella, enterotoxigenic Escherichia coli (ETEC), cholera, nontyphoidal Salmonella, and Campylobacter, and introduced a novel epitope- and structure-based vaccinology platform known as MEFA (multiepitope fusion antigen) and the application of MEFA for developing broadly protective multivalent vaccines against heterogenous pathogens.

Product review of the rotavirus vaccines ROTASIIL, ROTAVAC, and Rotavin-M1

Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe dehydrating gastroenteritis and death due to diarrhea among children under 5, causing over 180,000 under-5 deaths annually. Safe, effective rotavirus vaccines have been available for over a decade and are used in over 98 countries. In addition to the globally available, WHO-prequalified ROTARIX (GSK) and RotaTeq (Merck), several new rotavirus vaccines have attained national licensure - ROTAVAC (Bharat Biotech) and ROTASIIL (Serum Institute of India), licensed and manufactured in India and now WHO-prequalified, and Rotavin-M1 (PolyVac), licensed and manufactured in Vietnam. In this review, we summarize the available clinical trial and post-introduction evidence for these three new orally administered rotavirus vaccines. All three vaccines have demonstrated safety and efficacy against rotavirus diarrhea, although publicly available preclinical data are limited in some cases. This expanding product landscape presents a range of options to optimize immunization programs, and new presentations of each vaccine are currently under development.

Efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of a trivalent live human-lamb reassortant rotavirus vaccine (LLR3) in healthy Chinese infants: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial was conducted in healthy Chinese infants to assess the efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of a novel trivalent live human-lamb reassortant rotavirus vaccine (LLR3) against rotavirus gastroenteritis (RVGE).

METHODS

Healthy children aged 6-13 weeks were enrolled and randomized (1:1) to either 3 oral doses of LLR3 or placebo according to a 0, 1, 2 month schedule. The objectives were to evaluate vaccine efficacy (VE) against RVGE of any-severity, severe RVGE (sRVGE) and inpatient caused by rotavirus serotypes contained in the vaccine and not contained in the vaccine after the third dose. Immunogenicity was also assayed in a subgroup. All adverse events (AEs) were collected from 30 min after each dose for immediate reaction, even to the entire study period, including the serious AEs (SAEs) and intussusception.

RESULTS

VE against RVGE of any-severity, sRVGE and inpatient caused by any serotype was 56.6% (95% CI: 50.7, 61.8), 70.3% (95% CI: 60.6, 77.6) and 74.0% (95% CI: 57.5, 84.1) respectively. VE against RVGE of any-severity, sRVGE caused by serotypes not contained in vaccine were 54.2% (95% CI: 47.5, 60.1) and 70.4% (95% CI: 60.4, 77.9). The rate of seroconversion and four-fold increase of rotavirus serotype G2-, G3-, and G4-specific IgA is 60.8%, 58.0%, and 60.6% in vaccine group, which was higher than 21.35%, 22.7%, and 23.1% in placebo group (p < 0.0001 for G2, G3, G4), as well as the Geometric Mean Titer (GMT). Through the entire trial, 65.91% and 67.79% of participants reported at least one AE, and 0.02% and 0.02% reported SAEs in the vaccine and placebo groups, respectively. Two intussusception cases were reported both in vaccine and placebo group.

CONCLUSIONS

In Chinese infants, LLR3 provided a substantial protection against RVGE of any-severity, sRVGE and inpatient caused by any serotype, and showed well immunogenicity and safety.

Sero-epidemiological study of the rotavirus VP8* protein from different P genotypes in Valencia, Spain

The aims of the present work were to determine the prevalence and titer of serum antibodies against several rotavirus VP8* proteins from different P genotypes in children and adults in Valencia, Spain; and to determine the role of the secretor status (FUT2_G428A polymorphism) in the antibody response. The VP8* protein from the P[4], P[6], P[8], P[9], P[11], P[14] and P[25] genotypes were produced in E. coli. These proteins were tested with 88 serum samples from children (n = 41, 3.5 years old in average) and from adults (n = 47, 58 years old in average) by ELISA. A subset of 55 samples were genotyped for the FUT2_G428A polymorphism and the antibody titers compared. The same subset of samples was also analysed by ELISA using whole rotavirus Wa particles (G1P[8]) as antigen. Ninety-three per cent of the samples were positive for at least one of the VP8* antigens. Differences in the IgG seroprevalence were found between children and adults for the P[4], P[8] and P[11] genotypes. Similarly, significant differences were found between adults and children in their antibody titers against the P[4], P[8], and P[11] VP8* genotypes, having the children higher antibody titers than adults. Interestingly, positive samples against rare genotypes such as P[11] (only in children), P[14] and P[25] were found. While no statistical differences in the antibody titers between secretors and non-secretors were found for any of the tested P genotypes studied, a higher statistic significant prevalence for the P[25] genotype was found in secretors compared to non-secretors. Significant differences in the antibody titers between secretors and non-secretors were found when the whole viral particles from the Wa rotavirus strain (G1P[8]) were used as the antigen.