Background Tuberculosis remains one of the world's deadliest transmissible diseases despite the widespread use of BCG. MTBVAC is a new live tuberculosis vaccine based on a genetically attenuated phoP-/fadD26-deletion mutant of M. tuberculosis that expresses most antigens present in human isolates in contrast to BCG. Methods We conducted this randomized, double-blind, controlled phase I study at CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland, to compare MTBVAC to BCG in healthy, PPD-negative adults. Primary outcome was safety in all vaccinated participants. Secondary outcome included whole blood cell mediated immune response to live MTBVAC and BCG as well as interferon-gamma release assay (IGRA) on peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Volunteers fulfilling the inclusion criteria were randomly allocated (on a 3:1 basis) in a dose-escalation manner to three cohorts. Each cohort included 9 subjects who were injected with MTBVAC 5x10 3 , 5x10 4 , or 5x10 5 colony forming units (CFU) in 0.1 mL and 3 subjects with BCG (single dose of 5x10 5 CFU in 0.1 mL). Each subject received a single intradermal injection in the non-dominant arm starting with the lowest MTBVAC dose. Findings Thirty-six volunteers were recruited. Vaccination with MTBVAC (5x10 3 , 5x10 4 , 5x10 5 CFU/0.1mL) was as safe as with BCG, and did not induce serious adverse events. All individuals were IGRA negative at the end of follow-up (D210). After whole blood stimulation with live MTBVAC or BCG, MTBVAC was immunogenic in a dosedependent manner. At the same dose level as BCG (5x10 5 CFU), although no
Background Up to now, immunisation regimens that have been assessed for development of HIV vaccines have included purified envelope (Env) protein among the boosting components of the regimen. We postulated that co-administration of Env protein with either a DNA or NYVAC vector during priming would result in early generation of antibody responses to the Env V1/V2 region, which are important markers for effective protection against infection. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of a multivalent HIV vaccine including either DNA or NYVAC vectors alone or in combination with Env glycoprotein (gp120) followed by a co-delivered NYVAC and Env protein boost. MethodsWe did a single-centre, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1b trial at the Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Vaudois (Lausanne, Switzerland). We included healthy volunteers aged 18-50 years who were at low risk of HIV infection. We randomly allocated participants using computer-generated random numbers to one of four vaccination schedules or placebo (4:1), and within these schedules participants were allocated either active treatment (T1, T2, T3, and T4) or placebo (C1, C2, C3, and C4). T1 consisted of two doses of NYVAC vector followed by two doses of NYVAC vector and gp120 Env protein; T2 comprised four doses of NYVAC vector and gp120 Env protein; T3 was two doses of DNA vector followed by two doses of NYVAC vector and gp120 Env protein; and T4 was two doses of DNA vector and gp120 Env protein followed by two doses of NYVAC vector and gp120 Env protein. Placebo injections were matched to the corresponding active treatment group. Doses were administered by injection at months 0, 1, 3, and 6. Primary outcomes were safety and immunogenicity of the vaccine schedules. Immune response measures included cross-clade and epitope-specific binding antibodies, neutralising antibodies, and antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity measured 2 weeks after the month 1, 3, and 6 vaccinations. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01799954.
In a single-center study, 66 healthy volunteers aged between 18 and 50years were randomized to be immunized against rabies with three different injection routes: intradermal with DebioJect™ (IDJ), standard intradermal with classical needle (IDS), also called Mantoux method, and intramuscular with classical needle (IM). "Vaccin rabique Pasteur®" and saline solution (NaCl 0.9%) were administered at D0, D7 and D28. Antigen doses for both intradermal routes were 1/5 of the dose for IM. Tolerability, safety and induced immunogenicity of IDJ were compared to IDS and IM routes. Pain was evaluated at needle insertion and at product injection for all vaccination visits. Solicited Adverse Event (SolAE) and local reactogenicity symptoms including pain, redness and pruritus were recorded daily following each vaccination visit. Adverse events (AE) were recorded over the whole duration of the study. Humoral immune response was measured by assessing the rabies virus neutralizing antibody (VNA) titers using Rapid Fluorescent Focus Inhibition Test (RFFIT). Results demonstrated that the DebioJect™ is a safe, reliable and efficient device. Significant decreases of pain at needle insertion and at vaccine injection were reported with IDJ compared to IDS and IM. All local reactogenicity symptoms (pain, redness and pruritus) after injection with either vaccine or saline solution, were similar for IDJ and IDS, except that IDJ injection induced more redness 30min after saline solution. No systemic SolAE was deemed related to DebioJect™ and classical needles. No AE was deemed related to DebioJect™. No Serious Adverse Event (SAE) was reported during the study. At the end of the study all participants were considered immunized against rabies and no significant difference in humoral response was observed between the 3 studied routes.
Introduction: Targeting immune cells in the tumor microenvironment is an attractive approach to improving antitumor activity of standard therapy in r/r hematologic malignancies. Durvalumab is a monoclonal antibody that blocks programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1), allowing T cells to recognize and kill tumor cells. Methods: The FUSION NHL-001 study (NCT02733042) is a phase 1/2 study assessing safety and efficacy of durvalumab as monotherapy or in combination. Eligible patients (pts) must have had r/r DLBCL or FL after ≥1 systemic therapy requiring therapeutic intervention. Other inclusion criteria include ECOG performance status 0-2 and ≥1 CT-measurable lesion. Pretreatment tumor biopsies were collected to assess biomarkers of response to durvalumab combination therapies. Pts with r/r B-cell neoplasms were enrolled into 1 of 4 arms that included durvalumab monotherapy (Arm D) or in combination with lenalidomide ± rituximab (Arm A), ibrutinib (Arm B), or rituximab ± bendamustine (Arm C). Durvalumab was given at a fixed dose of 1500 mg every 4 weeks. The study consisted of 2 parts: dose finding (except for Arm D) to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) for each combination and dose confirmation. We present final subset analyses for pts with DLBCL and FL treated in Arms A, C, and D. Results: A total of 38 DLBCL and 22 FL pts were enrolled. Baseline characteristics are presented in Tables 1 and 2. Arm A was prematurely closed after an FDA announcement regarding safety concerns with combination of lenalidomide and checkpoint inhibitors in multiple myeloma; therefore, RP2D for lenalidomide ± rituximab could not be defined. However, 4 pts (DLBCL, n=1; FL, n=3) experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs): febrile neutropenia (lenalidomide 10 mg + rituximab), headache, hepatitis, and thrombocytopenia (lenalidomide 20 mg + rituximab). One pt with DLBCL experienced DLT in Arm C (neutropenia) when treated with bendamustine 90 mg/m2 + rituximab. RP2D for bendamustine was established as 70 mg/m2. Durvalumab treatment (13 infusions) was completed for 10 (DLBCL, n=4; FL, n=6) pts (17%), 2 in Arm A and 8 in Arm C; the main reason for durvalumab withdrawal was disease progression. During the study, 38 pts (63%) experienced 81 serious adverse events (SAEs), most frequently related to infections (Figure 1). A total of 22 immune-mediated AEs (imAEs) related to durvalumab were reported in 13 pts (grade 1, 2, and 3 in 9, 7, and 6 cases, respectively): transaminitis and increased bilirubin (9 events), diarrhea (5 events), rash and pruritus (5 events), thyroid disorder (2 events), and infusion-related reaction (1 event). Two pts were treated with systemic steroids, both for grade 3 transaminitis. Others received symptomatic treatment. Ten pts experienced AEs that led to any drug discontinuation: 4 in Arm A (cerebral ischemia, febrile neutropenia, myalgia, hyponatremia), 3 in Arm C (transaminitis; neutropenia in 2 pts) and 3 in Arm D (drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, gastrointestinal perforation, prolonged QT). There were 6 grade 5 AEs, none considered related to study drugs. For pts with DLBCL (Table 3), overall response rate (ORR) was 18% and complete response rate (CRR) was 8%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) (Figure 2) was 2.5 months (95% CI, 1.25-5.13). There were 30 deaths on study (2, 19, and 9 pts in Arms A, C, and D, respectively), 24 (80%) related to disease progression. Median overall survival (OS) was 7.9 months (2.66-15.31). For pts with FL (Table 3), ORR was 59% and CRR was 27%. Median PFS (Figure 3) was 10.6 months (4.63-NE). There were 6 deaths on study (2 and 4 pts in Arms A and D, respectively); 3 (50%) were related to disease progression and 1 to second primary malignancy (bladder cancer, Arm A). Median OS was not reached. An interferon-γ signature comprising 4 genes, IFN-γ, CD274, LAG3, and CXCL9, trended higher with best ORR in pts with r/r DLBCL (N=30, P=0.06) and FL (N=18, P=0.01) independent of treatment arm (Arms A, C, and D included in analysis). Conclusions: Durvalumab as monotherapy or in combination in DLBCL and FL is tolerable without unexpected safety signals but requires close monitoring. Durvalumab alone or in combination appeared to add limited benefit to therapy for r/r DLBCL or FL. However, use of an interferon-γ gene signature may serve as a biomarker by which to enrich for r/r NHL pts that may be more responsive to anti-PD-L1-based therapy and will require further investigation. Disclosures Casulo: Gilead: Honoraria, Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses; Roche: Other: Travel, accommodation, expenses; Celgene: Research Funding. Santoro:MSD: Speakers Bureau; Lilly: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Takeda: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; Abb-Vie: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Arqule: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Eisai: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Ando:Eisai: Research Funding. Le Gouill:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support; Roche-Genentech: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel support. Ruan:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics LLC, an AbbVie company: Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy. Radford:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; ADC Therapeutics: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria; AstraZeneca: Equity Ownership, Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; GSK: Equity Ownership. Arcaini:Celgene, Roche, Janssen-Cilag, Gilead: Other: Travel expenses; Gilead Sciences: Research Funding; Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Bayer, Celgene, Gilead Sciences, Roche, Sandoz, Janssen-Cilag, VERASTEM: Consultancy. Pinto:Roche: Speakers Bureau; Roche, Takeda: Other: Travel grants; EDO-Mundipharma: Patents & Royalties; Roche, MSD, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Servier: Honoraria; Servier, Roche, Bristol-Myers Squibb, MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Izutsu:Eisai, Chugai, Zenyaku: Honoraria; Eisai, Symbio, Chugai, Zenyaku: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Chugai, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Astra Zeneca, Eisai, Symbio, Ono, Bayer, Solasia, Zenyaku, Incyte, Novartis, Sanofi, HUYA Bioscience, MSD, Astellas Amgen, Abbvie, ARIAD, Takeda, Pfizer: Research Funding; Kyowa Kirin, Eisai, Takeda, MSD, Chugai, Nihon Medi-physics, Janssen, Ono, Abbvie, Dainihon Sumitomo, Bayer, Astra Zeneca, HUYA Japan, Novartis, Bristol-Byers Squibb, Mundi, Otsuka, Daiichi Sankyo, Astellas, Asahi Kasei: Honoraria. Rule:Astra-Zeneca: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sunesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pharmacyclics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; TG Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Napp: Consultancy; Kite: Consultancy. Munoz:Pharmacyclics /Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bayer: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Merck: Consultancy; Kyowa: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene/Juno: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Kite/Gilead: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy; Alexion: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Fosunkite: Speakers Bureau; AstraZeneca: Speakers Bureau; Portola: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding. Casadebaig:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fox:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rettby:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Dell'Aringa:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Delarue:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Newhall:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Czuczman:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Cartron:Roche, Celgene: Consultancy; Sanofi, Gilead, Janssen, Roche, Celgene: Honoraria. OffLabel Disclosure: Durvalumab is a PD-L1 blocking antibody indicated for the treatment of patients with 1) locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma who have disease progression during or following platinum-containing chemotherapy, or who have disease progression within 12 months of neoadjuvant or adjuvant treatment with platinum-containing chemotherapy, or 2) unresectable, stage 3 NSCLC whose disease has not progressed following concurrent platinum-based chemotherapy and radiation therapy.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.