Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated whole virion SARS-CoV-2 vaccine, TURKOVAC, in healthy adults: Interim results from randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 1 and 2 trials.


Journal

Vaccine
ISSN: 1873-2518
Titre abrégé: Vaccine
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 8406899

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 01 2023
Historique:
received: 13 04 2022
revised: 24 10 2022
accepted: 26 10 2022
pubmed: 3 12 2022
medline: 4 1 2023
entrez: 2 12 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Development of safe and effective vaccine options is crucial to the success of fight against COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we report interim safety and immunogenicity findings of the phase 1&2 trials of ERUCoV-VAC, an inactivated whole virion SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. Double-blind, randomised, single centre, phase 1 and 2 trials included SARS-CoV-2 seronegative healthy adults aged 18-55 years (18-64 in phase 2). All participants, except the first 4 in phase 1 who received ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg or 6 μg unblinded and monitored for 7 days for safety purposes, were assigned to receive two intramuscular doses of ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg or 6 μg (an inactivated vaccine containing alhydrogel as adjuvant) or placebo 21 days apart (28 days in phase 2) according to computer-generated randomisation schemes. Both trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (phase 1, NCT04691947 and phase 2, NCT04824391). Forty-four participants (3 μg [n:17], 6 μg [n:17], placebo [n:10]) in phase 1 and 250 (3 μg [n:100], 6 μg [n:100], placebo [n:50]) in phase 2 received ≥1 dose. In phase 1 trial, 25 adverse events AEs (80 % mild) occured in 15 participants (34.1 %) until day 43. There was no dose-response relationship noted in safety events in ERUCoV-VAC recipients (p = 0.4905). Pain at injection site was the most common AE (9/44;20.5 %). Both doses of ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg groups were comparable in inducing SARS-CoV-2 wild-type neutralising antibody (MNT50): GMTs (95 %CI) were 8.3 (6.4-10.3) vs. 8.6 (7.0-10.2) at day 43 (p = 0.7357) and 9.7 (6.0-13.4) vs. 10.8 (8.8-12.8) at day 60 (p = 0.8644), respectively. FRNT50 confirmed MNT50 results: SARS-CoV-2 wild-type neutralising antibody GMTs (95 %CI) were 8.4 (6.3-10.5) vs. 9.0 (7.2-10.8) at day 43 (p = 0.5393) and 11.0 (7.0-14.9) vs. 12.3 (10.3-14.5) at day 60 (p = 0.8578). Neutralising antibody seroconversion rates (95 %CI) were 86.7 % (59.5-98.3) vs 94.1 % (71.3-99.8) at day 43 (p = 0.8727) and 92.8 % (66.1-99.8) vs. 100 % (79.4-100.0) at day 60 (p = 0.8873), in ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg groups, respectively. In phase 2 trial, 268 AEs, (67.2 % moderate in severity) occured in 153 (61.2 %) participants. The most common local and systemic AEs were pain at injection site (23 events in 21 [8.4 %] subjects) and headache (56 events in 47 [18.8 %] subjects), respectively. Pain at injection site was the only AE with a significantly higher frequency in the ERUCoV-VAC groups than in the placebo arm in the phase 2 study (p = 0.0322). ERUCoV-VAC groups were comparable in frequency of AEs (p = 0.4587). ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg groups were comparable neutralising antibody (MNT Two-dose regimens of ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg 28 days both had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile and elicited comparable neutralising antibody responses and seroconversion rates exceeding 95 % at day 43 and 60 after the first vaccination. Data availability Data will be made available on request.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Development of safe and effective vaccine options is crucial to the success of fight against COVID-19 pandemic. Herein, we report interim safety and immunogenicity findings of the phase 1&2 trials of ERUCoV-VAC, an inactivated whole virion SARS-CoV-2 vaccine.
METHODS
Double-blind, randomised, single centre, phase 1 and 2 trials included SARS-CoV-2 seronegative healthy adults aged 18-55 years (18-64 in phase 2). All participants, except the first 4 in phase 1 who received ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg or 6 μg unblinded and monitored for 7 days for safety purposes, were assigned to receive two intramuscular doses of ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg or 6 μg (an inactivated vaccine containing alhydrogel as adjuvant) or placebo 21 days apart (28 days in phase 2) according to computer-generated randomisation schemes. Both trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (phase 1, NCT04691947 and phase 2, NCT04824391).
RESULTS
Forty-four participants (3 μg [n:17], 6 μg [n:17], placebo [n:10]) in phase 1 and 250 (3 μg [n:100], 6 μg [n:100], placebo [n:50]) in phase 2 received ≥1 dose. In phase 1 trial, 25 adverse events AEs (80 % mild) occured in 15 participants (34.1 %) until day 43. There was no dose-response relationship noted in safety events in ERUCoV-VAC recipients (p = 0.4905). Pain at injection site was the most common AE (9/44;20.5 %). Both doses of ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg groups were comparable in inducing SARS-CoV-2 wild-type neutralising antibody (MNT50): GMTs (95 %CI) were 8.3 (6.4-10.3) vs. 8.6 (7.0-10.2) at day 43 (p = 0.7357) and 9.7 (6.0-13.4) vs. 10.8 (8.8-12.8) at day 60 (p = 0.8644), respectively. FRNT50 confirmed MNT50 results: SARS-CoV-2 wild-type neutralising antibody GMTs (95 %CI) were 8.4 (6.3-10.5) vs. 9.0 (7.2-10.8) at day 43 (p = 0.5393) and 11.0 (7.0-14.9) vs. 12.3 (10.3-14.5) at day 60 (p = 0.8578). Neutralising antibody seroconversion rates (95 %CI) were 86.7 % (59.5-98.3) vs 94.1 % (71.3-99.8) at day 43 (p = 0.8727) and 92.8 % (66.1-99.8) vs. 100 % (79.4-100.0) at day 60 (p = 0.8873), in ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg groups, respectively. In phase 2 trial, 268 AEs, (67.2 % moderate in severity) occured in 153 (61.2 %) participants. The most common local and systemic AEs were pain at injection site (23 events in 21 [8.4 %] subjects) and headache (56 events in 47 [18.8 %] subjects), respectively. Pain at injection site was the only AE with a significantly higher frequency in the ERUCoV-VAC groups than in the placebo arm in the phase 2 study (p = 0.0322). ERUCoV-VAC groups were comparable in frequency of AEs (p = 0.4587). ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg groups were comparable neutralising antibody (MNT
CONCLUSIONS
Two-dose regimens of ERUCoV-VAC 3 μg and 6 μg 28 days both had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile and elicited comparable neutralising antibody responses and seroconversion rates exceeding 95 % at day 43 and 60 after the first vaccination. Data availability Data will be made available on request.

Identifiants

pubmed: 36460536
pii: S0264-410X(22)01380-9
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2022.10.093
pmc: PMC9678819
pii:
doi:

Substances chimiques

Antibodies, Neutralizing 0
Antibodies, Viral 0
COVID-19 Vaccines 0
TURKOVAC 0
Vaccines, Inactivated 0

Banques de données

ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04691947', 'NCT04824391']

Types de publication

Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

380-390

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Aykut Ozdarendeli, Shaikh Terkis Islam Pavel, Hazel Yetiskin, Muhammet Ali Uygut and Gunsu Aydin are the named inventors on patent applications covering inactivated COVID-19 vaccine development.

Auteurs

Aykut Ozdarendeli (A)

Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye. Electronic address: aozdarendeli@erciyes.edu.tr.

Zafer Sezer (Z)

Department of Medical Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Good Clinical Practise Centre (IKUM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye. Electronic address: zsezer@erciyes.edu.tr.

Shaikh Terkis Islam Pavel (STI)

Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Ahmet Inal (A)

Department of Medical Pharmacology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Good Clinical Practise Centre (IKUM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Hazel Yetiskin (H)

Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Busra Kaplan (B)

Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Muhammet Ali Uygut (MA)

Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Adnan Bayram (A)

Department of Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Mumtaz Mazicioglu (M)

Good Clinical Practise Centre (IKUM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Gamze Kalin Unuvar (GK)

Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Zeynep Ture Yuce (ZT)

Department of Infectious Diseases and Clinical Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Gunsu Aydin (G)

Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Ahmet Furkan Aslan (AF)

Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye.

Refika Kamuran Kaya (RK)

Vaccine Research, Development and Application Centre (ERAGEM), Erciyes University, Kayseri, Turkiye; Health Institutes of Turkiye (TUSEB), Istanbul, Turkiye.

Rabia Cakir Koc (RC)

Health Institutes of Turkiye (TUSEB), Istanbul, Turkiye; Department of Bioenginering, Faculty of Chemistry-Metallurgy, Yildiz Technical University, Faculty of Bioengineering, Turkiye.

Ihsan Ates (I)

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Health Sciences Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkiye.

Ates Kara (A)

Hacettepe University, Faculty of Medicine Department of Pediatrics, Pediatric Infectious Diseases, Ankara, Turkiye.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH