Hana M El Sahly1, Robert L Atmar2, Shital M Patel2, Abbie Bellamy3, Liwei Liu4, Wenshan Hong4, Huachen Zhu4, Yi Guan5, Wendy A Keitel6. 1. Department of Molecular Virology and Microbiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States. Electronic address: hanae@bcm.edu. 2. Section of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States. 3. The Emmes Corporation, Rockville, MD, United States. 4. Joint Institute of Virology (Shantou University-The University of Hong Kong), Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, Guangdong, China. 5. Joint Institute of Virology (Shantou University-The University of Hong Kong), Shantou University Medical College, Shantou, Guangdong, China; State Key Laboratory of Emerging Infectious Diseases, School of Public Health, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China. 6. Department of Molecular Virology and Microbiology, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX, United States.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Influenza A/H7N9 viruses are undergoing antigenic drift since their emergence in 2013, and vaccination strategies are needed for pandemic preparedness. Two doses of adjuvanted monovalent inactivated influenza A/H7N9 vaccine (IIV1 A/H7N9) are needed for optimal serological responses. However, administering 2 doses in a pandemic setting might be challenging. We evaluated the immunogenicity of "boosting" with IIV1 A/H7N9 in subjects "primed" 8 years previously with IIV1 A/H7N7. METHODS: We administered 1 booster dose containing 45 mcg of IIV1 A/H7N9 hemagglutinin to 17 recipients of 2 prior doses of IIV1 A/H7N7, and to 10 influenza A/H7-naïve subjects. We tested their post-boosting sera for antibodies (Ab) against homologous influenza A/H7N9 using a hemagglutination inhibition assay; and compared their Ab titers to those in stored sera from recipients of AS03-adjuvanted IIV1 A/H7N9 against 9 strains of influenza A/H7N9 viruses. RESULTS: The percentage of subjects with Ab titers ≥40 on Days 9 and 29 post boosting, respectively, was 65% and 41% in primed subjects and 10% and 0% in unprimed subjects. The Ab titers in recipients of AS03-adjuvanted IIV1 A/H7N9 were higher than those in the prime-boost group against a panel of influenza A/H7N9 viruses, except for 2 highly pathogenic strains. CONCLUSIONS: Priming with IIV1 A/H7 results in serological responses following a delayed boost with 1 dose of unadjuvanted IIV1 A/H7N9, despite lack of antibody response after the prime. Optimizing prime-boost approaches would benefit pandemic preparedness. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02586792.
BACKGROUND:Influenza A/H7N9 viruses are undergoing antigenic drift since their emergence in 2013, and vaccination strategies are needed for pandemic preparedness. Two doses of adjuvanted monovalent inactivated influenza A/H7N9 vaccine (IIV1 A/H7N9) are needed for optimal serological responses. However, administering 2 doses in a pandemic setting might be challenging. We evaluated the immunogenicity of "boosting" with IIV1 A/H7N9 in subjects "primed" 8 years previously with IIV1 A/H7N7. METHODS: We administered 1 booster dose containing 45 mcg of IIV1 A/H7N9 hemagglutinin to 17 recipients of 2 prior doses of IIV1 A/H7N7, and to 10 influenza A/H7-naïve subjects. We tested their post-boosting sera for antibodies (Ab) against homologous influenza A/H7N9 using a hemagglutination inhibition assay; and compared their Ab titers to those in stored sera from recipients of AS03-adjuvanted IIV1 A/H7N9 against 9 strains of influenza A/H7N9 viruses. RESULTS: The percentage of subjects with Ab titers ≥40 on Days 9 and 29 post boosting, respectively, was 65% and 41% in primed subjects and 10% and 0% in unprimed subjects. The Ab titers in recipients of AS03-adjuvanted IIV1 A/H7N9 were higher than those in the prime-boost group against a panel of influenza A/H7N9 viruses, except for 2 highly pathogenic strains. CONCLUSIONS: Priming with IIV1 A/H7 results in serological responses following a delayed boost with 1 dose of unadjuvanted IIV1 A/H7N9, despite lack of antibody response after the prime. Optimizing prime-boost approaches would benefit pandemic preparedness. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02586792.
Authors: Mark J Mulligan; David I Bernstein; Patricia Winokur; Richard Rupp; Evan Anderson; Nadine Rouphael; Michelle Dickey; Jack T Stapleton; Srilatha Edupuganti; Paul Spearman; Dilek Ince; Diana L Noah; Heather Hill; Abbie R Bellamy Journal: JAMA Date: 2014-10-08 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Nega Ali Goji; Carrie Nolan; Heather Hill; Mark Wolff; Diana L Noah; Tracy B Williams; Thomas Rowe; John J Treanor Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2008-09-01 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Robert B Couch; Robert L Atmar; Luis M Franco; John M Quarles; Janet Wells; Nancy Arden; Diane Niño; John W Belmont Journal: J Infect Dis Date: 2013-01-10 Impact factor: 5.226
Authors: Jessica A Belser; Kortney M Gustin; Melissa B Pearce; Taronna R Maines; Hui Zeng; Claudia Pappas; Xiangjie Sun; Paul J Carney; Julie M Villanueva; James Stevens; Jacqueline M Katz; Terrence M Tumpey Journal: Nature Date: 2013-07-10 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Christine M Oshansky; James King; Di Lu; James Zhou; Corrina Pavetto; Gary Horwith; Karen Biscardi; Bai Nguyen; John J Treanor; Li-Mei Chen; Brett Jepson; Rick A Bright; Robert A Johnson; Vittoria Cioce; Ruben O Donis Journal: NPJ Vaccines Date: 2021-03-19 Impact factor: 7.344
Authors: Nikunj M Shukla; Michael Chan; Fitzgerald S Lao; Paul J Chu; Masiel Belsuzarri; Shiyin Yao; Jason Nan; Fumi Sato-Kaneko; Tetsuya Saito; Tomoko Hayashi; Maripat Corr; Dennis A Carson; Howard B Cottam Journal: Bioorg Med Chem Date: 2021-05-30 Impact factor: 3.641