Clinical phase II and III studies of an AS03-adjuvanted H5N1 influenza vaccine produced in an EB66® cell culture platform

Avian Influenza Virus A(H5Nx) and Prepandemic Candidate Vaccines: State of the Art

Avian influenza virus has been long considered the main threat for a future pandemic. Among the possible avian influenza virus subtypes, A(H5N1) clade 2.3.4.4b is becoming enzootic in mammals, representing an alarming step towards a pandemic. In particular, genotype B3.13 has recently caused an outbreak in US dairy cattle. Since pandemic preparedness is largely based on the availability of prepandemic candidate vaccine viruses, in this review we will summarize the current status of the enzootics, and challenges for H5 vaccine manufacturing and delivery.

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.

Headache After Vaccination: An Update on Recent Clinical Trials and Real-World Reporting

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this review is to characterize headache as a vaccine adverse event (VAE) in clinical trials.

RECENT FINDINGS

Of the recent phase III vaccine RCTs (non-COVID-19), 53 studies reported on headache (13 infectious agents). The median rate (interquartile range) of headache was 15.6% (IQR: 9.6-37.6%). Of these, 24.5% of the RCTs reported headache greater in the vaccine group compared to the placebo/control group. In the herpes zoster vaccination trials, headache was more common in all active groups: median rate 33.9% (IQR: 29.7-40.5%) as compared to placebo: median rate 17.7% (IQR: 15.4-23.8%). Influenza and HPV vaccination trials were the 2nd and 3rd most common to have headache as a VAE. Of the 6 widely distributed COVID-19 vaccinations, median rate of post-vaccination headache was 39% (IQR: 28-50%). Headache is a common VAE in vaccine trials. Standardized grading methods, predictors of persistence, and treatment regimens are warranted.

A comprehensive overview of vaccines developed for pandemic viral pathogens over the past two decades including those in clinical trials for the current novel SARS-CoV-2

The unprecedented coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is triggered by a novel strain of coronavirus namely, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome-Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Researchers are working around the clock to control this pandemic and consequent waves of viral reproduction, through repurposing existing drugs as well as designing new vaccines. Several countries have hastened vaccine design and clinical trials to quickly address this outbreak. Currently, more than 250 aspirants against SARS-CoV-2 are in progress, including mRNA-replicating or non-replicating viral vectored-, DNA-, autologous dendritic cell-based-, and inactivated virus-vaccines. Vaccines work by prompting effector mechanisms such as cells/molecules, which target quickly replicating pathogens and neutralize their toxic constituents. Vaccine-stimulated immune effectors include adjuvant, affinity, avidity, affinity maturation, antibodies, antigen-presenting cells, B lymphocytes, carrier protein, CD4+ T-helper cells. In this review, we describe updated information on the various vaccines available over the last two decades, along with recent progress in the ongoing battle developing 63 diverse vaccines against SARS-CoV-2. The inspiration of our effort is to convey the current investigation focus on registered clinical trials (as of January 08, 2021) that satisfy the safety and efficacy criteria of international wide vaccine development.

Clinical phase II and III studies of an AS03-adjuvanted H5N1 influenza vaccine produced in an EB66® cell culture platform

Background

We have developed an AS03‐adjuvanted H5N1 influenza vaccine produced in an EB66^® cell culture platform (KD‐295).

Objectives

In accordance with Japanese guidelines for development of pandemic prototype vaccines, the phase II study was conducted in a double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐group comparison study and the phase III study was conducted in an open‐label, non‐randomized, uncontrolled study.

Methods

Healthy adult volunteers aged 20 ‐ 64 years enrolled in the phase II and III studies (N = 248 and N = 369) received KD‐295 intramuscularly twice with a 21‐day interval. After administration, immune response and adverse events were evaluated. In the phase II study, four different vaccine formulations were compared: MA (3.75 μg hemagglutinin [HA] antigen + AS03 adjuvant system), MB (3.75 μg HA + 1/2AS03), HA (7.5 μg HA + AS03), and HB (7.5 μg HA + 1/2AS03). In the phase III study, the MA formulation was further evaluated.

Results

In the phase II study, all four vaccine formulations were well‐tolerated and no SAE related to vaccination were observed. The MA formulation was slightly more immunogenic and less reactogenic among the vaccine formulations. Therefore, the MA formulation was selected for the phase III study, and it was well‐tolerated and no serious adverse drug reactions were observed. The vaccine fulfilled the three immunogenicity criteria described in the Japanese guidelines.

Conclusions

These data indicate that the MA formulation of KD‐295 was well‐tolerated and highly immunogenic and it can be considered a useful pandemic and pre‐pandemic influenza vaccine.