A Dose-finding Study of a Wild-type Influenza A(H3N2) Virus in a Healthy Volunteer Human Challenge Model

Abstract

Background The development of vaccines and therapeutics has relied on healthy volunteer influenza challenge studies. A validated human infection model with wild-type A(H1N1)pdm09 was reported previously. Our objective was to characterize a wild-type influenza A/Bethesda/MM1/H3N2 challenge virus in healthy volunteers. Methods Participants received a single dose of a cell-based, reverse-genetics, Good Manufacturing Practices–produced wild-type influenza A(H3N2)2011 virus intranasally and were isolated at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center for ≥9 days. Dose escalation was performed from 104 to 107 TCID50 (50% tissue culture infectious dose). Viral shedding and clinical disease were evaluated daily. Results Of 37 participants challenged, 16 (43%) had viral shedding and 27 (73%) developed symptoms, with 12 (32%) participants experiencing mild to moderate influenza disease (MMID), defined as shedding and symptoms. Only participants receiving 106 and 107 TCID50 experienced MMID at 44% and 40%, respectively. Symptom severity peaked on day 3, whereas most viral shedding occurred 1–2 days after challenge. Only 10 (29%) participants had a ≥4-fold rise in hemagglutination inhibition antibody titer after challenge. Conclusions The A/Bethesda/MM1/H3N2 challenge virus safely induced MMID in healthy volunteers, but caused less MMID than the A(H1N1)pdm09 challenge virus even at the highest dose. There was less detection of shedding though the incidence of symptoms was similar to A(H1N1)pdm09. Fewer serum anti-hemagglutinin (HA) antibody responses with less MMID indicate that preexisting immunity factors other than anti-HA antibody may limit shedding in healthy volunteers. This A/Bethesda/MM1/H3N2 challenge virus can be utilized in future studies to further explore pathogenesis and immunity and to evaluate vaccine candidates. Clinical Trials Registration NCT02594189

Efficacy of FLU-v, a broad-spectrum influenza vaccine, in a randomized phase IIb human influenza challenge study

“…Overall geometric mean HAI titers did increase after infection indicating exposure to the challenge virus. Titers remained low as has been observed before in human challenge models that screen participants for low HAI titers prior to challenge [32][33][34] , suggesting that screening for low HAI titer in challenge trials may select for a higher proportion of individuals than the 10-20% found in the general population that do not mount good antibody responses against the HA of influenza [35][36][37] . It is possible that these individuals may have a stronger cellular response to influenza than those who have a strong anti-HA head humoral response.…”

Human Challenge Studies Are Unlikely to Accelerate Coronavirus Vaccine Licensure Due to Ethical and Practical Issues

“…After 2012, 2 influenza A strains were approved for use under an IND, with an initial goal of establishing an infectious dose that would cause mild to moderate disease in ≥60% of the volunteers. Those escalating dose-finding trials involved 46 volunteers over a 15-month period for an H1N1 virus and 37 volunteers over a 19-month period for an H3N2 virus [ 8 , 9 ]. Thus, the time needed to standardize a SARS-CoV2 infection model will be substantial.…”

Negative pressure face shield for flexible laryngoscopy in the COVID‐19 era

“…The limited access to the nose and oral cavity through use of the Studies addressing influenza have identified that both infectivity and the severity of an infection are dependent on the viral load to which a patient is exposed. 18,19 While this dose-dependence has not been specifically identified for SARS-CoV-2, eliminating or minimizing the inoculum of exposure is a reasonable goal for any aerosolized virus that has the potential for infection. Although there is currently no single strategy available to completely eradicate the risk of coronavirus transmission, methods to decrease dissemination such as the NPFS are likely to be beneficial.…”

“…Studies addressing influenza have identified that both infectivity and the severity of an infection are dependent on the viral load to which a patient is exposed 18,19 . While this dose‐dependence has not been specifically identified for SARS‐CoV‐2, eliminating or minimizing the inoculum of exposure is a reasonable goal for any aerosolized virus that has the potential for infection.…”