Literature DB >> 25734089

Safety Profile of the Merck Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 Clade B gag DNA Plasmid Vaccine With and Without Adjuvants.

Erin K Quirk1, Elizabeth L Brown1, Randi Y Leavitt1, Robin Mogg1, Devan V Mehrotra1, Robert K Evans1, Mark J DiNubile2, Michael N Robertson1.   

Abstract

The immunogenicity results from 3 phase I trials of the Merck DNA human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) vaccine have previously been reported. Because preventive DNA vaccine strategies continue to be leveraged for diverse infections, the safety and tolerability results from these studies can inform the field moving forward, particularly regarding adverse reactions and adjuvants. No serious vaccine-related adverse events were reported during the 3-dose priming phase. Pain at the injection site was more common with adjuvanted formulations than with the phosphate-buffered saline diluent alone. Febrile reactions were usually low grade. Although the AlPO4 or CRL1005 adjuvants used in these studies did not significantly enhance the immunogenicity of the DNA vaccine, adverse events were numerically more common with adjuvanted formulations than without adjuvants.

Entities:  

Keywords:  DNA plasmid vaccine; HIV; adjuvants; safety

Year:  2014        PMID: 25734089      PMCID: PMC4324197          DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofu016

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis        ISSN: 2328-8957            Impact factor:   3.835


DNA-vaccine strategies continue to be explored for the prevention of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), influenza, respiratory syncytial virus, cytomegalovirus, hepatitis C virus, and other viral, bacterial, and parasitic infections [1-5] as well as for noninfectious diseases [6, 7]. Adjuvants can augment cell-mediated immune responses against some vaccine targets. Traditional adjuvants based on aluminum compounds are thought to act as depots, slowing absorption of antigen while recruiting inflammatory cells, activating complement, and affecting particle size to facilitate uptake of antigen by antigen-presenting cells. A newer group of adjuvants based on nonionic block copolymer compounds had been used extensively as pharmaceutical excipients and later developed as potential vaccine adjuvants. CRL1005, originally developed by CytRx Corp (Norcross, GA), is a linear triblock copolymer with a polyoxypropylene core of molecular weight 12 kDa and 5% polyoxyethylene. Potential mechanisms of action include direct stimulation of macrophages and indirect activation of the complement cascade. In animal models and clinical trials, copolymer adjuvants such as CRL1005 have been generally well tolerated while variably enhancing cell-mediated immune responses to some vaccines [8]. In preclinical testing, both the AlPO4 and CRL1005 adjuvants augmented antigen-specific immune responses against simian immunodeficiency virus induced by a DNA-plasmid vaccine in rhesus macaques [9]. Because a prime-boost strategy initiated with a DNA vaccine is still an area of active research, unpublished information regarding the safety and tolerability of the discontinued Merck HIV-1 DNA-plasmid vaccine with and without an adjuvant during the 3-dose priming series remains relevant to the field [8-10]. Healthy HIV-seronegative adults were enrolled in 3 independent dose-escalating, blinded, placebo-controlled phase I trials evaluating the safety and immunogenicity of a 3-dose homologous priming regimen of the Merck HIV-1 gag vaccine containing 1 mg or 5 mg DNA per 1 mL dose formulated as a sterile solution of phosphate-buffered saline ([PBS] 6 mM sodium phosphate, 150 mM NaCl, pH 7.2) with or without either AlPO4 (0.7 mg/mL) or CRL1005 (7.5 mg/mL) with 0.6 mM benzalkonium chloride [8]. Placebos consisted of an identical diluent with or without 0.7 mg AlPO4/mL. Subjects received priming doses of the DNA-plasmid at weeks 0, 4, and 8, followed by a booster at week 26 with either the DNA or adenovirus-type 5 vaccine. The 1.0 mL dose of vaccine or placebo was to be injected intramuscularly using an appropriately sized needle based on the clinician's judgment at a 90° angle into the deltoid. All injections were to be administered in the same arm. Local and systemic adverse events were respectively monitored for at least 5 and 15 days following each intradeltoid injection. Of 360 randomized subjects, 359 (99.7%) received ≥1 injection and were included in the analyses, and 343 (95.3%) completed the full 3-dose priming series (Table 1). Predominantly young white adults with a slight preponderance of men over women entered the study. Unfractionated gag-specific interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunosorbent spot (ELISPOT) responses were more robust after the 5 mg than the 1 mg DNA-dose but were not significantly enhanced by the addition of either adjuvant. Postprime response rates (predefined as the proportion of subjects with ≥55 spot-forming cells per 106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells with at least a 4-fold increase over control at week 12 [4 weeks after the last priming dose]) for the unadjuvanted vaccine formulation (21.9%) trended modestly higher than for the CRL1005-adjuvanted vaccine (16.0%) and essentially the same as the AlPO4-adjuvanted vaccine (22.5%) [8]. Postprime geometric-mean ELISPOT titers were likewise similar across the 3 formulations, ranging from 67 to 79 spot-forming cells.
Table 1.

Baseline Characteristics by Treatment Group During the Priming Phases of the Combined Studies

1 mg DNA/ PBS (N = 42)5 mg DNA/ PBS (N = 74)5 mg DNA/ AlPO4 (N = 78)5 mg DNA/ CRL 1005 (N = 89)Placebo/PBS (N = 41)Placebo/AlPO4 (N = 35)
Gender (n [%])
 Male26 (62)38 (51)48 (62)53 (60)24 (59)17 (49)
 Female16 (38)36 (49)30 (38)36 (40)17 (41)18 (51)
Age (years)
 Median343732373937
 Range18–5519–5318–5020–5018–5518–50
 Asian/Pacific1 (2)0 (0)4 (5)2 (2)0 (0)0 (0)
Racial/Ethnic Origin (n [%])
 Black5 (12)7 (9)4 (5)6 (7)4 (10)3 (9)
 Caucasian34 (81)63 (85)67 (86)78 (88)35 (85)31 (89)
 Hispanic2 (5)3 (4)2 (3)2 (2)1 (2)1 (3)
 Indian0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)1 (2)0 (0)
 Native American0 (0)1 (1)0 (0)1 (1)0 (0)0 (0)
 Multiracial0 (0)0 (0)1 (1)0 (0)0 (0)0 (0)

Abbreviations: N, number of vaccinated subjects; n, number of subjects in each category; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline.

Baseline Characteristics by Treatment Group During the Priming Phases of the Combined Studies Abbreviations: N, number of vaccinated subjects; n, number of subjects in each category; PBS, phosphate-buffered saline. No serious vaccine-related adverse events were reported. No subject discontinued participation during the priming phase because of vaccine-related adverse events. Local reactions were more common than systemic side-effects. Pain at the injection site occurred more often with adjuvanted formulations than with the PBS diluent, whether given with or without DNA. Despite symptomatic differences, local signs of inflammation developed with generally similar frequency in the presence or absence of adjuvant. The proportions of subjects with injection site reactions in each treatment group remained fairly constant after each of the 3 priming doses. The rates of systemic adverse events were generally comparable in the vaccine and placebo groups, although the incidence of headache and fatigue were modestly higher in the presence than absence of adjuvant [10]. Febrile reactions were mostly low grade, usually <38°C. Although the addition of AlPO4 or CRL1005 adjuvants did not appear to enhance immunogenicity of the DNA vaccine, adverse reactions were numerically more common with adjuvanted formulations than without adjuvants. In summary, no serious adverse reactions were attributed to the Merck HIV-1 gag vaccine whether administered with or without an adjuvant. Both local and systemic side-effects were generally mild. Injection-site pain was more frequent and prominent in recipients of adjuvanted formulations, even when given as part of the placebo. Because the adjuvants used in these studies did not produce a discernable immunological benefit but negatively impacted the local tolerability of the vaccine [8, 10], routine inclusion of these adjuvants in future DNA-vaccine trials does not appear to be prudent unless persuasive evidence of their utility with a particular vaccine exists [11]. Novel adjuvants are under development [12, 13].
  12 in total

1.  Vaccine adjuvant safety: the elephant in the room.

Authors:  Nikolai Petrovsky
Journal:  Expert Rev Vaccines       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.217

Review 2.  Synthetic DNA vaccine strategies against persistent viral infections.

Authors:  Daniel O Villarreal; Kendra T Talbott; Daniel K Choo; Devon J Shedlock; David B Weiner
Journal:  Expert Rev Vaccines       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 5.217

3.  A DNA vaccine against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated antigen-4 (CTLA-4) prevents tumor growth.

Authors:  Keng-Hsueh Lan; Yu-Chang Liu; Yi-Sheng Shih; Chang-Liang Tsaid; Sang-Hue Yen; Keng-Li Lan
Journal:  Biochem Biophys Res Commun       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 3.575

4.  Efficacy trial of a DNA/rAd5 HIV-1 preventive vaccine.

Authors:  Scott M Hammer; Magdalena E Sobieszczyk; Holly Janes; Shelly T Karuna; Mark J Mulligan; Doug Grove; Beryl A Koblin; Susan P Buchbinder; Michael C Keefer; Georgia D Tomaras; Nicole Frahm; John Hural; Chuka Anude; Barney S Graham; Mary E Enama; Elizabeth Adams; Edwin DeJesus; Richard M Novak; Ian Frank; Carter Bentley; Shelly Ramirez; Rong Fu; Richard A Koup; John R Mascola; Gary J Nabel; David C Montefiori; James Kublin; M Juliana McElrath; Lawrence Corey; Peter B Gilbert
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2013-10-07       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Comparative cell-mediated immunogenicity of DNA/DNA, DNA/adenovirus type 5 (Ad5), or Ad5/Ad5 HIV-1 clade B gag vaccine prime-boost regimens.

Authors:  David M Asmuth; Elizabeth L Brown; Mark J DiNubile; Xiao Sun; Carlos del Rio; Clayton Harro; Michael C Keefer; James G Kublin; Sheri A Dubey; Lisa S Kierstead; Danilo R Casimiro; John W Shiver; Michael N Robertson; Erin K Quirk; Devan V Mehrotra
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2010-01-01       Impact factor: 5.226

6.  Comparative immunogenicity in rhesus monkeys of DNA plasmid, recombinant vaccinia virus, and replication-defective adenovirus vectors expressing a human immunodeficiency virus type 1 gag gene.

Authors:  Danilo R Casimiro; Ling Chen; Tong-Ming Fu; Robert K Evans; Michael J Caulfield; Mary-Ellen Davies; Aimin Tang; Minchun Chen; Lingyi Huang; Virginia Harris; Daniel C Freed; Keith A Wilson; Sheri Dubey; De-Min Zhu; Denise Nawrocki; Henryk Mach; Robert Troutman; Lynne Isopi; Donna Williams; William Hurni; Zheng Xu; Jeffrey G Smith; Su Wang; Xu Liu; Liming Guan; Romnie Long; Wendy Trigona; Gwendolyn J Heidecker; Helen C Perry; Natasha Persaud; Timothy J Toner; Qin Su; Xiaoping Liang; Rima Youil; Michael Chastain; Andrew J Bett; David B Volkin; Emilio A Emini; John W Shiver
Journal:  J Virol       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 5.103

7.  Prime-boost interval matters: a randomized phase 1 study to identify the minimum interval necessary to observe the H5 DNA influenza vaccine priming effect.

Authors:  Julie E Ledgerwood; Kathryn Zephir; Zonghui Hu; Chih-Jen Wei; Leejah Chang; Mary E Enama; Cynthia S Hendel; Sandra Sitar; Robert T Bailer; Richard A Koup; John R Mascola; Gary J Nabel; Barney S Graham
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2013-04-30       Impact factor: 5.226

8.  Safety and comparative immunogenicity of an HIV-1 DNA vaccine in combination with plasmid interleukin 12 and impact of intramuscular electroporation for delivery.

Authors:  Spyros A Kalams; Scott D Parker; Marnie Elizaga; Barbara Metch; Srilatha Edupuganti; John Hural; Stephen De Rosa; Donald K Carter; Kyle Rybczyk; Ian Frank; Jonathan Fuchs; Beryl Koblin; Denny H Kim; Patrice Joseph; Michael C Keefer; Lindsey R Baden; John Eldridge; Jean Boyer; Adam Sherwat; Massimo Cardinali; Mary Allen; Michael Pensiero; Chris Butler; Amir S Khan; Jian Yan; Niranjan Y Sardesai; James G Kublin; David B Weiner
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2013-07-08       Impact factor: 5.226

9.  Development of a new DNA vaccine for Alzheimer disease targeting a wide range of aβ species and amyloidogenic peptides.

Authors:  Yoh Matsumoto; Naoko Niimi; Kuniko Kohyama
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2013-09-27       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  A heterologous prime/boost vaccination strategy enhances the immunogenicity of therapeutic vaccines for hepatitis C virus.

Authors:  Anne Fournillier; Lars Frelin; Emilie Jacquier; Gustaf Ahlén; Anette Brass; Estelle Gerossier; Fredrik Holmström; Kate E Broderick; Niranjan Y Sardesai; Jean-Yves Bonnefoy; Geneviève Inchauspé; Matti Sällberg
Journal:  J Infect Dis       Date:  2013-06-17       Impact factor: 5.226

View more
  2 in total

Review 1.  Improvement of DNA vaccination by adjuvants and sophisticated delivery devices: vaccine-platforms for the battle against infectious diseases.

Authors:  Thomas Grunwald; Sebastian Ulbert
Journal:  Clin Exp Vaccine Res       Date:  2015-01-30

Review 2.  Advances in gene-based vaccine platforms to address the COVID-19 pandemic.

Authors:  Deborah Pushparajah; Salma Jimenez; Shirley Wong; Hibah Alattas; Nafiseh Nafissi; Roderick A Slavcev
Journal:  Adv Drug Deliv Rev       Date:  2021-01-07       Impact factor: 17.873

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.