Immunogenicity and safety of different dose schedules and antigen doses of an MF59-adjuvanted H7N9 vaccine in healthy adults aged 65 years and older

A Phase 2 Clinical Trial to Evaluate the Safety, Reactogenicity, and Immunogenicity of Different Prime-Boost Vaccination Schedules of 2013 and 2017 A(H7N9) Inactivated Influenza Virus Vaccines Administered With and Without AS03 Adjuvant in Healthy US Adults

INTRODUCTION

A surge of human influenza A(H7N9) cases began in 2016 in China from an antigenically distinct lineage. Data are needed about the safety and immunogenicity of 2013 and 2017 A(H7N9) inactivated influenza vaccines (IIVs) and the effects of AS03 adjuvant, prime-boost interval, and priming effects of 2013 and 2017 A(H7N9) IIVs.

METHODS

Healthy adults (n = 180), ages 19-50 years, were enrolled into this partially blinded, randomized, multicenter phase 2 clinical trial. Participants were randomly assigned to 1 of 6 vaccination groups evaluating homologous versus heterologous prime-boost strategies with 2 different boost intervals (21 vs 120 days) and 2 dosages (3.75 or 15 μg of hemagglutinin) administered with or without AS03 adjuvant. Reactogenicity, safety, and immunogenicity measured by hemagglutination inhibition and neutralizing antibody titers were assessed.

RESULTS

Two doses of A(H7N9) IIV were well tolerated, and no safety issues were identified. Although most participants had injection site and systemic reactogenicity, these symptoms were mostly mild to moderate in severity; injection site reactogenicity was greater in vaccination groups receiving adjuvant. Immune responses were greater after an adjuvanted second dose, and with a longer interval between prime and boost. The highest hemagglutination inhibition geometric mean titer (95% confidence interval) observed against the 2017 A(H7N9) strain was 133.4 (83.6-212.6) among participants who received homologous, adjuvanted 3.75 µg + AS03/2017 doses with delayed boost interval.

CONCLUSIONS

Administering AS03 adjuvant with the second H7N9 IIV dose and extending the boost interval to 4 months resulted in higher peak antibody responses. These observations can broadly inform strategic approaches for pandemic preparedness. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03589807.

Immunogenicity and safety of varying dosages of a fifth-wave influenza A/H7N9 inactivated vaccine given with and without AS03 adjuvant in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Human infections with the avian influenza A(H7N9) virus were first reported in China in 2013 and continued to occur in annual waves. In the 2016/2017 fifth wave, Yangtze River Delta (YRD) lineage viruses, which differed antigenically from those of earlier waves, predominated.

METHODS

In this phase 2 double-blinded trial we randomized 720 adults ≥ 19 years of age to receive two injections of a YRD lineage inactivated A/Hong Kong/125/2017 fifth-wave H7N9 vaccine, given 21 days apart, at doses of 3.75, 7.5, and 15 µg of hemagglutinin (HA) with AS03A adjuvant and at doses of 15 and 45 µg of HA without adjuvant.

RESULTS

Two doses of adjuvanted vaccine were required to induce HA inhibition (HI) antibody titers ≥ 40 in most participants. After two doses of the 15 µg H7N9 formulation, given with or without AS03 adjuvant, the proportion achieving a HI titer ≥ 40 against the vaccine strain at 21 days after the second vaccination was 65 % (95 % CI, 57 %-73 %) and 0 % (95 % CI, 0 %-4%), respectively. Among those who received two doses of the 15 µg adjuvanted formulation the proportion with HI titer ≥ 40 at 21 days after the second vaccination was 76 % (95 % CI, 66 %-84 %) in those 19-64 years of age and 49 % (95 % CI, 37 %-62 %) in those ≥ 65 years of age. Responses to the adjuvanted vaccine formulations did not vary by HA content. Antibody responses declined over time and responses against drifted H7N9 strains were diminished. Overall, the vaccines were well tolerated but, as expected, adjuvanted vaccines were associated with more frequent solicited systemic and local adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

AS03 adjuvant improved the immune responses to an inactivated fifth-wave H7N9 influenza vaccine, particularly in younger adults, but invoked lower responses to drifted H7N9 strains. These findings may inform future influenza pandemic preparedness strategies.

Influenza vaccines: where we are, where we are going

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Influenza vaccines are the most useful strategy for preventing influenza illness, especially in the setting of the COVID-19 pandemic. For the coming year (2021/2022) all vaccines will be quadrivalent and contain two influenza A strains [(H1N1)pdm09-like and (H3N2)-like viruses] and two influenza B strains (Victoria lineage-like and Yamagata lineage-like viruses). However, the currently licensed have suboptimal efficacy due to the emergence of new strains and vaccine production limitations. In this review, we summarize the current recommendations as well as new advancements in influenza vaccinations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent advances have been aimed at moving away from egg-based vaccines and toward cell culture and recombinant vaccines. This removes egg adaptations that decrease vaccine efficacy, removes the reliance on egg availability and decreases the time necessary to manufacture vaccines. However, even more radical changes are needed if we are to reach the ultimate goal of a universal vaccine capable of providing long-lasting protection against all or at least most influenza strains. We discuss various strategies, including using more stable influenza antigens such as the hemagglutinin stalk and internal proteins as well as new adjuvants, new vaccine formulations, and DNA/RNA-based vaccines that are currently being developed.

SUMMARY

The currently available vaccines have suboptimal efficacy and do not provide adequate protection against drifted and shifted strains. Thus, the development of a universal influenza vaccine that induces long-lasing immunity and protects against a broad range of strains is crucial.