澳大利亚婴儿接种全细胞和无细胞百日咳混合疫苗的免疫原性、反应性和 IgE 介导的免疫反应:随机、双盲、非劣效试验。

IF 15.8 1区 医学 Q1 Medicine PLoS Medicine Pub Date : 2024-06-10 eCollection Date: 2024-06-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pmed.1004414
Gladymar Pérez Chacón, Marie J Estcourt, James Totterdell, Julie A Marsh, Kirsten P Perrett, Dianne E Campbell, Nicholas Wood, Michael Gold, Claire S Waddington, Michael O' Sullivan, Sonia McAlister, Nigel Curtis, Mark Jones, Peter B McIntyre, Patrick G Holt, Peter C Richmond, Tom Snelling
{"title":"澳大利亚婴儿接种全细胞和无细胞百日咳混合疫苗的免疫原性、反应性和 IgE 介导的免疫反应:随机、双盲、非劣效试验。","authors":"Gladymar Pérez Chacón, Marie J Estcourt, James Totterdell, Julie A Marsh, Kirsten P Perrett, Dianne E Campbell, Nicholas Wood, Michael Gold, Claire S Waddington, Michael O' Sullivan, Sonia McAlister, Nigel Curtis, Mark Jones, Peter B McIntyre, Patrick G Holt, Peter C Richmond, Tom Snelling","doi":"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004414","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In many countries, infant vaccination with acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines has replaced use of more reactogenic whole-cell pertussis (wP) vaccines. Based on immunological and epidemiological evidence, we hypothesised that substituting the first aP dose in the routine vaccination schedule with wP vaccine might protect against IgE-mediated food allergy. We aimed to compare reactogenicity, immunogenicity, and IgE-mediated responses of a mixed wP/aP primary schedule versus the standard aP-only schedule.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>OPTIMUM is a Bayesian, 2-stage, double-blind, randomised trial. In stage one, infants were assigned (1:1) to either a first dose of a pentavalent wP combination vaccine (DTwP-Hib-HepB, Pentabio PT Bio Farma, Indonesia) or a hexavalent aP vaccine (DTaP-Hib-HepB-IPV, Infanrix hexa, GlaxoSmithKline, Australia) at approximately 6 weeks old. Subsequently, all infants received the hexavalent aP vaccine at 4 and 6 months old as well as an aP vaccine at 18 months old (DTaP-IPV, Infanrix-IPV, GlaxoSmithKline, Australia). Stage two is ongoing and follows the above randomisation strategy and vaccination schedule. Ahead of ascertainment of the primary clinical outcome of allergist-confirmed IgE-mediated food allergy by 12 months old, here we present the results of secondary immunogenicity, reactogenicity, tetanus toxoid IgE-mediated immune responses, and parental acceptability endpoints. Serum IgG responses to diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis antigens were measured using a multiplex fluorescent bead-based immunoassay; total and specific IgE were measured in plasma by means of the ImmunoCAP assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The immunogenicity of the mixed schedule was defined as being noninferior to that of the aP-only schedule using a noninferiority margin of 2/3 on the ratio of the geometric mean concentrations (GMR) of pertussis toxin (PT)-IgG 1 month after the 6-month aP. Solicited adverse reactions were summarised by study arm and included all children who received the first dose of either wP or aP. Parental acceptance was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. The primary analyses were based on intention-to-treat (ITT); secondary per-protocol (PP) analyses were also performed. The trial is registered with ANZCTR (ACTRN12617000065392p). Between March 7, 2018 and January 13, 2020, 150 infants were randomised (75 per arm). PT-IgG responses of the mixed schedule were noninferior to the aP-only schedule at approximately 1 month after the 6-month aP dose [GMR = 0·98, 95% credible interval (0·77 to 1·26); probability (GMR > 2/3) > 0·99; ITT analysis]. At 7 months old, the posterior median probability of quantitation for tetanus toxoid IgE was 0·22 (95% credible interval 0·12 to 0·34) in both the mixed schedule group and in the aP-only group. Despite exclusions, the results were consistent in the PP analysis. At 6 weeks old, irritability was the most common systemic solicited reaction reported in wP (65 [88%] of 74) versus aP (59 [82%] of 72) vaccinees. At the same age, severe systemic reactions were reported among 14 (19%) of 74 infants after wP and 8 (11%) of 72 infants after aP. There were 7 SAEs among 5 participants within the first 6 months of follow-up; on blinded assessment, none were deemed to be related to the study vaccines. Parental acceptance of mixed and aP-only schedules was high (71 [97%] of 73 versus 69 [96%] of 72 would agree to have the same schedule again).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to the aP-only schedule, the mixed schedule evoked noninferior PT-IgG responses, was associated with more severe reactions, but was well accepted by parents. Tetanus toxoid IgE responses did not differ across the study groups.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Trial registered at the Australian and New Zealand Clinical 207 Trial Registry (ACTRN12617000065392p).</p>","PeriodicalId":49008,"journal":{"name":"PLoS Medicine","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":15.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11198910/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and IgE-mediated immune responses of a mixed whole-cell and acellular pertussis vaccine schedule in Australian infants: A randomised, double-blind, noninferiority trial.\",\"authors\":\"Gladymar Pérez Chacón, Marie J Estcourt, James Totterdell, Julie A Marsh, Kirsten P Perrett, Dianne E Campbell, Nicholas Wood, Michael Gold, Claire S Waddington, Michael O' Sullivan, Sonia McAlister, Nigel Curtis, Mark Jones, Peter B McIntyre, Patrick G Holt, Peter C Richmond, Tom Snelling\",\"doi\":\"10.1371/journal.pmed.1004414\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In many countries, infant vaccination with acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines has replaced use of more reactogenic whole-cell pertussis (wP) vaccines. Based on immunological and epidemiological evidence, we hypothesised that substituting the first aP dose in the routine vaccination schedule with wP vaccine might protect against IgE-mediated food allergy. We aimed to compare reactogenicity, immunogenicity, and IgE-mediated responses of a mixed wP/aP primary schedule versus the standard aP-only schedule.</p><p><strong>Methods and findings: </strong>OPTIMUM is a Bayesian, 2-stage, double-blind, randomised trial. In stage one, infants were assigned (1:1) to either a first dose of a pentavalent wP combination vaccine (DTwP-Hib-HepB, Pentabio PT Bio Farma, Indonesia) or a hexavalent aP vaccine (DTaP-Hib-HepB-IPV, Infanrix hexa, GlaxoSmithKline, Australia) at approximately 6 weeks old. Subsequently, all infants received the hexavalent aP vaccine at 4 and 6 months old as well as an aP vaccine at 18 months old (DTaP-IPV, Infanrix-IPV, GlaxoSmithKline, Australia). Stage two is ongoing and follows the above randomisation strategy and vaccination schedule. Ahead of ascertainment of the primary clinical outcome of allergist-confirmed IgE-mediated food allergy by 12 months old, here we present the results of secondary immunogenicity, reactogenicity, tetanus toxoid IgE-mediated immune responses, and parental acceptability endpoints. Serum IgG responses to diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis antigens were measured using a multiplex fluorescent bead-based immunoassay; total and specific IgE were measured in plasma by means of the ImmunoCAP assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The immunogenicity of the mixed schedule was defined as being noninferior to that of the aP-only schedule using a noninferiority margin of 2/3 on the ratio of the geometric mean concentrations (GMR) of pertussis toxin (PT)-IgG 1 month after the 6-month aP. Solicited adverse reactions were summarised by study arm and included all children who received the first dose of either wP or aP. Parental acceptance was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. The primary analyses were based on intention-to-treat (ITT); secondary per-protocol (PP) analyses were also performed. The trial is registered with ANZCTR (ACTRN12617000065392p). Between March 7, 2018 and January 13, 2020, 150 infants were randomised (75 per arm). PT-IgG responses of the mixed schedule were noninferior to the aP-only schedule at approximately 1 month after the 6-month aP dose [GMR = 0·98, 95% credible interval (0·77 to 1·26); probability (GMR > 2/3) > 0·99; ITT analysis]. At 7 months old, the posterior median probability of quantitation for tetanus toxoid IgE was 0·22 (95% credible interval 0·12 to 0·34) in both the mixed schedule group and in the aP-only group. Despite exclusions, the results were consistent in the PP analysis. At 6 weeks old, irritability was the most common systemic solicited reaction reported in wP (65 [88%] of 74) versus aP (59 [82%] of 72) vaccinees. At the same age, severe systemic reactions were reported among 14 (19%) of 74 infants after wP and 8 (11%) of 72 infants after aP. There were 7 SAEs among 5 participants within the first 6 months of follow-up; on blinded assessment, none were deemed to be related to the study vaccines. Parental acceptance of mixed and aP-only schedules was high (71 [97%] of 73 versus 69 [96%] of 72 would agree to have the same schedule again).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to the aP-only schedule, the mixed schedule evoked noninferior PT-IgG responses, was associated with more severe reactions, but was well accepted by parents. Tetanus toxoid IgE responses did not differ across the study groups.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>Trial registered at the Australian and New Zealand Clinical 207 Trial Registry (ACTRN12617000065392p).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49008,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":15.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11198910/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PLoS Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004414\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/6/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Medicine\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLoS Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1004414","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在许多国家,婴儿接种无细胞百日咳(aP)疫苗已取代了反应性更强的全细胞百日咳(wP)疫苗。根据免疫学和流行病学证据,我们假设用 wP 疫苗代替常规接种计划中的第一剂 aP 疫苗可能会预防 IgE 介导的食物过敏。我们的目的是比较 wP/aP 混合接种方案与纯 aP 标准接种方案的反应原性、免疫原性和 IgE 介导的反应:OPTIMUM 是一项贝叶斯、两阶段、双盲、随机试验。在第一阶段,婴儿在约 6 周大时被分配(1:1)接种第一剂五价 wP 混合疫苗(DTwP-Hib-HepB,Pentabio PT Bio Farma,印度尼西亚)或六价 aP 疫苗(DTaP-Hib-HepB-IPV,Infanrix hexa,葛兰素史克,澳大利亚)。随后,所有婴儿在 4 个月和 6 个月大时接种六价 aP 疫苗,并在 18 个月大时接种 aP 疫苗(DTaP-IPV,Infanrix-IPV,澳大利亚葛兰素史克公司)。第二阶段正在进行中,采用上述随机策略和疫苗接种计划。在确定12个月大时由过敏症专家确诊的IgE介导的食物过敏这一主要临床结果之前,我们在此介绍次要免疫原性、反应原性、破伤风类毒素IgE介导的免疫反应和家长接受度终点的结果。血清中对白喉、破伤风和百日咳抗原的 IgG 反应是通过多重荧光珠免疫测定法测定的;血浆中的总 IgE 和特异性 IgE 是通过 ImmunoCAP 测定法(赛默飞世尔科技公司)测定的。混合方案的免疫原性被定义为不劣于纯百日咳方案的免疫原性,其非劣性差值为百日咳方案6个月后1个月百日咳毒素(PT)-IgG几何平均浓度(GMR)比值的2/3。按研究臂对征求到的不良反应进行汇总,包括所有接受首剂 wP 或 aP 的儿童。家长的接受程度采用 5 点李克特量表进行评估。主要分析以意向治疗(ITT)为基础,同时还进行了每方案(PP)次要分析。该试验已在 ANZCTR 注册(ACTRN12617000065392p)。2018年3月7日至2020年1月13日期间,150名婴儿接受了随机治疗(每组75名)。6个月aP剂量后约1个月时,混合方案的PT-IgG反应不劣于纯aP方案[GMR=0-98,95%可信区间(0-77至1-26);概率(GMR>2/3)>0-99;ITT分析]。7 个月大时,混合方案组和纯 aP 组破伤风类毒素 IgE 定量的后中位概率均为 0-22(95% 可信区间为 0-12 至 0-34)。尽管排除了其他因素,但 PP 分析的结果是一致的。6周大时,烦躁是wP组(74人中有65人[88%])和aP组(72人中有59人[82%])接种者最常见的全身性诱发反应。在同一年龄段,接种 wP 疫苗的 74 名婴儿中有 14 名(19%)出现了严重的全身反应,接种 aP 疫苗的 72 名婴儿中有 8 名(11%)出现了严重的全身反应。在最初 6 个月的随访中,有 5 名参与者发生了 7 例 SAE;经过盲法评估,没有发现任何与研究疫苗有关的情况。家长对混合接种和纯 aP 接种方案的接受度很高(73 名家长中有 71 人 [97%] 同意再次接种相同的接种方案,72 名家长中有 69 人 [96%] 同意再次接种相同的接种方案)。结论 与纯 aP 方案相比,混合方案引起的 PT-IgG 反应并不差,但反应更严重,但家长接受度高。各研究组的破伤风类毒素 IgE 反应没有差异:试验在澳大利亚和新西兰临床 207 试验注册中心注册(ACTRN12617000065392p)。https://www.anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?id=371998&isReview=true。只有一个登记处(同上)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and IgE-mediated immune responses of a mixed whole-cell and acellular pertussis vaccine schedule in Australian infants: A randomised, double-blind, noninferiority trial.

Background: In many countries, infant vaccination with acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines has replaced use of more reactogenic whole-cell pertussis (wP) vaccines. Based on immunological and epidemiological evidence, we hypothesised that substituting the first aP dose in the routine vaccination schedule with wP vaccine might protect against IgE-mediated food allergy. We aimed to compare reactogenicity, immunogenicity, and IgE-mediated responses of a mixed wP/aP primary schedule versus the standard aP-only schedule.

Methods and findings: OPTIMUM is a Bayesian, 2-stage, double-blind, randomised trial. In stage one, infants were assigned (1:1) to either a first dose of a pentavalent wP combination vaccine (DTwP-Hib-HepB, Pentabio PT Bio Farma, Indonesia) or a hexavalent aP vaccine (DTaP-Hib-HepB-IPV, Infanrix hexa, GlaxoSmithKline, Australia) at approximately 6 weeks old. Subsequently, all infants received the hexavalent aP vaccine at 4 and 6 months old as well as an aP vaccine at 18 months old (DTaP-IPV, Infanrix-IPV, GlaxoSmithKline, Australia). Stage two is ongoing and follows the above randomisation strategy and vaccination schedule. Ahead of ascertainment of the primary clinical outcome of allergist-confirmed IgE-mediated food allergy by 12 months old, here we present the results of secondary immunogenicity, reactogenicity, tetanus toxoid IgE-mediated immune responses, and parental acceptability endpoints. Serum IgG responses to diphtheria, tetanus, and pertussis antigens were measured using a multiplex fluorescent bead-based immunoassay; total and specific IgE were measured in plasma by means of the ImmunoCAP assay (Thermo Fisher Scientific). The immunogenicity of the mixed schedule was defined as being noninferior to that of the aP-only schedule using a noninferiority margin of 2/3 on the ratio of the geometric mean concentrations (GMR) of pertussis toxin (PT)-IgG 1 month after the 6-month aP. Solicited adverse reactions were summarised by study arm and included all children who received the first dose of either wP or aP. Parental acceptance was assessed using a 5-point Likert scale. The primary analyses were based on intention-to-treat (ITT); secondary per-protocol (PP) analyses were also performed. The trial is registered with ANZCTR (ACTRN12617000065392p). Between March 7, 2018 and January 13, 2020, 150 infants were randomised (75 per arm). PT-IgG responses of the mixed schedule were noninferior to the aP-only schedule at approximately 1 month after the 6-month aP dose [GMR = 0·98, 95% credible interval (0·77 to 1·26); probability (GMR > 2/3) > 0·99; ITT analysis]. At 7 months old, the posterior median probability of quantitation for tetanus toxoid IgE was 0·22 (95% credible interval 0·12 to 0·34) in both the mixed schedule group and in the aP-only group. Despite exclusions, the results were consistent in the PP analysis. At 6 weeks old, irritability was the most common systemic solicited reaction reported in wP (65 [88%] of 74) versus aP (59 [82%] of 72) vaccinees. At the same age, severe systemic reactions were reported among 14 (19%) of 74 infants after wP and 8 (11%) of 72 infants after aP. There were 7 SAEs among 5 participants within the first 6 months of follow-up; on blinded assessment, none were deemed to be related to the study vaccines. Parental acceptance of mixed and aP-only schedules was high (71 [97%] of 73 versus 69 [96%] of 72 would agree to have the same schedule again).

Conclusions: Compared to the aP-only schedule, the mixed schedule evoked noninferior PT-IgG responses, was associated with more severe reactions, but was well accepted by parents. Tetanus toxoid IgE responses did not differ across the study groups.

Trial registration: Trial registered at the Australian and New Zealand Clinical 207 Trial Registry (ACTRN12617000065392p).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
PLoS Medicine
PLoS Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
17.60
自引率
0.60%
发文量
227
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: PLOS Medicine is a prominent platform for discussing and researching global health challenges. The journal covers a wide range of topics, including biomedical, environmental, social, and political factors affecting health. It prioritizes articles that contribute to clinical practice, health policy, or a better understanding of pathophysiology, ultimately aiming to improve health outcomes across different settings. The journal is unwavering in its commitment to uphold the highest ethical standards in medical publishing. This includes actively managing and disclosing any conflicts of interest related to reporting, reviewing, and publishing. PLOS Medicine promotes transparency in the entire review and publication process. The journal also encourages data sharing and encourages the reuse of published work. Additionally, authors retain copyright for their work, and the publication is made accessible through Open Access with no restrictions on availability and dissemination. PLOS Medicine takes measures to avoid conflicts of interest associated with advertising drugs and medical devices or engaging in the exclusive sale of reprints.
期刊最新文献
Impact of active case finding for tuberculosis with mass chest X-ray screening in Glasgow, Scotland, 1950-1963: An epidemiological analysis of historical data. Safety and tolerability of tegoprubart in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A Phase 2A clinical trial. Incidence rates of hepatocellular carcinoma based on risk stratification in steatotic liver disease for precision medicine: A real-world longitudinal nationwide study. Leveraging behavioral economics strategies to close gaps in biomedical HIV prevention. The effect of protecting women against economic shocks to fight HIV in Cameroon, Africa: The POWER randomised controlled trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1