Safety and immunogenicity of locally produced trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (Tri Fluvac) in healthy Thai adults aged 18-64 years in Nakhon Phanom: A Phase III double blinded, three-arm, randomized, controlled trial.

Adult Clinical trial Influenza vaccines Thailand

Journal

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

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
01 Dec 2023
Historique:
received: 27 08 2023
revised: 24 11 2023
accepted: 24 11 2023
medline: 3 12 2023
pubmed: 3 12 2023
entrez: 2 12 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Domestic influenza vaccine production facilitates a sustainable supply for mitigating seasonal influenza and improves national health security by providing infrastructure and experience for pandemic vaccine production, if needed. A Phase III, double blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted from Sep 2019-Oct 2020 in healthy adults 18-64 years in Nakhon Phanom, Thailand. Randomization (3:3:1) compared study vaccine (Tri Fluvac), saline placebo, and an active comparator (licensed vaccine). Primary outcomes were superior efficacy compared to placebo based on RT-PCR-confirmed influenza virus infection within 12 months and non-inferiority compared to active comparator based on immunogenicity (HAI assay) at 28 days. Safety was also assessed. The trial enrolled 4,284 participants (Tri Fluvac = 1,836; placebo = 1,836; active comparator = 612). There were 29 RT-PCR positive influenza infections (10 Tri Fluvac, 5.5/1,000 PY; 19 placebo, 10.4/1,000PY; 0 comparator) for an absolute protective efficacy of 46.4 (95 % CI = -22.0-76.5) compared with placebo, but the power was 43.7 %. Seroconversion difference rates between Tri Fluvac and comparator at Day 28 were 1.74 (95 % CI: -2.77, 6.25), 2.22 (-2.40, 6.84), and -0.57 (-5.41, 4.27) for A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and B strains, respectively. Adverse and severe adverse events occurred in 175 (9.5 %) Tri Fluvac, 177 (10.8 %) placebo, and 66 (10.8 %) comparator arms (p-value = 0.437, Tri Fluvac vs. comparator) CONCLUSIONS: Tri Fluvac was well tolerated, and immunogenicity was non-inferior to the active comparator, meeting U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) criteria for adult vaccine licensure. Few acute respiratory infections were reported during intense COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, resulting in insufficient power to evaluate clinical efficacy.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Domestic influenza vaccine production facilitates a sustainable supply for mitigating seasonal influenza and improves national health security by providing infrastructure and experience for pandemic vaccine production, if needed.
METHODS METHODS
A Phase III, double blind, randomized controlled trial was conducted from Sep 2019-Oct 2020 in healthy adults 18-64 years in Nakhon Phanom, Thailand. Randomization (3:3:1) compared study vaccine (Tri Fluvac), saline placebo, and an active comparator (licensed vaccine). Primary outcomes were superior efficacy compared to placebo based on RT-PCR-confirmed influenza virus infection within 12 months and non-inferiority compared to active comparator based on immunogenicity (HAI assay) at 28 days. Safety was also assessed.
RESULTS RESULTS
The trial enrolled 4,284 participants (Tri Fluvac = 1,836; placebo = 1,836; active comparator = 612). There were 29 RT-PCR positive influenza infections (10 Tri Fluvac, 5.5/1,000 PY; 19 placebo, 10.4/1,000PY; 0 comparator) for an absolute protective efficacy of 46.4 (95 % CI = -22.0-76.5) compared with placebo, but the power was 43.7 %. Seroconversion difference rates between Tri Fluvac and comparator at Day 28 were 1.74 (95 % CI: -2.77, 6.25), 2.22 (-2.40, 6.84), and -0.57 (-5.41, 4.27) for A(H1N1), A(H3N2), and B strains, respectively. Adverse and severe adverse events occurred in 175 (9.5 %) Tri Fluvac, 177 (10.8 %) placebo, and 66 (10.8 %) comparator arms (p-value = 0.437, Tri Fluvac vs. comparator) CONCLUSIONS: Tri Fluvac was well tolerated, and immunogenicity was non-inferior to the active comparator, meeting U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) criteria for adult vaccine licensure. Few acute respiratory infections were reported during intense COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, resulting in insufficient power to evaluate clinical efficacy.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38042698
pii: S0264-410X(23)01396-8
doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2023.11.050
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

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: K.P., P.W., P.N., S.S., N.S., and N.T. are employees of Thai GPO. This project submitted to Thai Clinical Trials Registry: TCTR20190625002 (https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/show/TCTR20190625002).

Auteurs

Kriengkrai Prasert (K)

Nakhon Phanom Provincial Hospital, Nakhon Phanom, Thailand; Faculty of Public Health, Kasetsart University, Chalermprakiat Sakon Nakhon Province Campus, Thailand.

Prabda Praphasiri (P)

Faculty of Public Health, Kasetsart University, Chalermprakiat Sakon Nakhon Province Campus, Thailand; Influenza Program, Thailand Ministry of Public Health-U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration, Nonthaburi, Thailand. Electronic address: hpu3@cdc.gov.

Hatairat Lerdsamran (H)

Center for Research and Innovation, Faculty of Medical Technology, Mahidol University, Salaya, Nakhon Pathom, Thailand.

Sutthichai Nakphook (S)

Faculty of Public Health, Kasetsart University, Chalermprakiat Sakon Nakhon Province Campus, Thailand; Institute of Preventive Medicine, Department of Disease Control, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

Darunee Ditsungnoen (D)

Influenza Program, Thailand Ministry of Public Health-U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

Sutthinan Chawalchitiporn (S)

Nakhon Phanom Provincial Hospital, Nakhon Phanom, Thailand.

Kanlaya Sornwong (K)

Nakhon Phanom Provincial Hospital, Nakhon Phanom, Thailand.

Kittisak Poopipatpol (K)

Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO), Bangkok, Thailand.

Ponthip Wirachwong (P)

Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO), Bangkok, Thailand.

Piengthong Narakorn (P)

Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO), Bangkok, Thailand.

Somchaiya Surichan (S)

Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO), Bangkok, Thailand.

Nava Suthepakul (N)

Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO), Bangkok, Thailand.

Napawan Thangsupanimitchai (N)

Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GPO), Bangkok, Thailand.

Chakrarat Pittayawonganon (C)

Institute of Preventive Medicine, Department of Disease Control, Ministry of Public Health, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

Pilaipan Puthavathana (P)

Influenza Program, Thailand Ministry of Public Health-U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration, Nonthaburi, Thailand.

William W Davis (WW)

Influenza Program, Thailand Ministry of Public Health-U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Collaboration, Nonthaburi, Thailand; Influenza Division, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Joshua A Mott (JA)

Influenza Division, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Sonja J Olsen (SJ)

Influenza Division, US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Jayanton Patumanond (J)

Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.

Classifications MeSH