Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorBaden, Lindsey R
dc.contributor.authorKarita, Etienne
dc.contributor.authorMutua, Gaudensia
dc.contributor.authorBekker, Linda-Gail
dc.contributor.authorGray, Glenda
dc.contributor.authorPage-Shipp, Liesl
dc.contributor.authorWalsh, Stephen R
dc.contributor.authorNyombayire, Julien
dc.contributor.authorAnzala, Omu
dc.contributor.authorRoux, Surita
dc.contributor.authorLaher, Fatima
dc.contributor.authorInnes, Craig
dc.contributor.authorSeaman, Michael S
dc.contributor.authorCohen, Yehuda Z
dc.contributor.authorPeter, Lauren
dc.date.accessioned2016-06-08T07:44:58Z
dc.date.available2016-06-08T07:44:58Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.identifier.citationAnn Intern Med. 2016;164(5):313-322en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://annals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2484873
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11295/96077
dc.description.abstractBackground: A prophylactic HIV-1 vaccine is a global health priority. Objective: To assess a novel vaccine platform as a prophylactic HIV-1 regimen. Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Both participants and study personnel were blinded to treatment allocation. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01215149) Setting: United States, East Africa, and South Africa. Patients: Healthy adults without HIV infection. Intervention: 2 HIV-1 vaccines (adenovirus serotype 26 with an HIV-1 envelope A insert [Ad26.EnvA] and adenovirus serotype 35 with an HIV-1 envelope A insert [Ad35.Env], both administered at a dose of 5 × 1010 viral particles) in homologous and heterologous combinations. Measurements: Safety and immunogenicity and the effect of baseline vector immunity. Results: 217 participants received at least 1 vaccination, and 210 (>96%) completed follow-up. No vaccine-associated serious adverse events occurred. All regimens were generally well-tolerated. All regimens elicited humoral and cellular immune responses in nearly all participants. Preexisting Ad26- or Ad35-neutralizing antibody titers had no effect on vaccine safety and little effect on immunogenicity. In both homologous and heterologous regimens, the second vaccination significantly increased EnvA antibody titers (approximately 20-fold from the median enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay titers of 30–300 to 3000). The heterologous regimen of Ad26–Ad35 elicited significantly higher EnvA antibody titers than Ad35–Ad26. T-cell responses were modest and lower in East Africa than in South Africa and the United States. Limitations: Because the 2 envelope inserts were not identical, the boosting responses were complex to interpret. Durability of the immune responses elicited beyond 1 year is unknown. Conclusion: Both vaccines elicited significant immune responses in all populations. Baseline vector immunity did not significantly affect responses. Second vaccinations in all regimens significantly boosted EnvA antibody titers, although vaccine order in the heterologous regimen had a modest effect on the immune response.en_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/us/*
dc.titleAssessment of the Safety and Immunogenicity of 2 Novel Vaccine Platforms for HIV-1 Prevention: A Randomized Trialen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 United States