Immunogenicity and safety of an adjuvanted inactivated polio vaccine, IPV-Al, following vaccination in children at 2, 4, 6 and at 15-18 months.

Clicks: 230
ID: 103691
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #72 of 86 articles by views in Vaccine

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Availability of affordable inactivated polio vaccines (IPV) is of major importance to meet the increasing global supply needs. The results presented here demonstrate non-inferiority of a reduced-dose, aluminium hydroxide-adjuvanted IPV (IPV-Al) to standard IPV.A phase 3, observer-blinded, randomised, clinical trial was conducted in Panama in infants who received either IPV-Al (n = 400) or standard IPV (n = 400) at age 2, 4 and 6 months. In the booster trial, subjects received a single dose of IPV-Al at age 15-18 months. The primary endpoint was type-specific seroconversion, defined as an antibody titre ≥4-fold higher than the estimated maternal antibody titre and a titre ≥8, one month after the primary vaccination series. In the booster trial, the primary endpoint was the type-specific booster effects (geometric mean titre (GMT) post-booster (Day 28)/GMT pre-booster (Day 0).Seroconversion rates following primary vaccination with IPV-Al vs IPV were: 96.1% vs 100% (type 1); 100% vs 100% (type 2); and 99.2% vs 100% (type 3) respectively. IPV-Al was non-inferior to IPV, as the lower 95% confidence limits of the treatment differences were above the pre-defined -10%-point limit: 3.94% (-6.51; -2.01) for type 1; 0.0% (-1.30; -1.37) for type 2; -0.85 (-2.46; 0.40) for type 3. The booster effects for the group primed with IPV-Al versus the group primed with IPV were 25.3 vs 9.2 (type 1), 19.1 vs 6.5 (type 2) and 50.4 vs 12.5 (type 3). IPV-Al had a comparable safety profile to that of IPV.Non-inferiority of IPV-Al to standard IPV with respect to seroconversion after vaccination at 2, 4 and 6 months was confirmed for all three poliovirus serotypes. A robust booster response was demonstrated following vaccination with IPV-Al, regardless of the primary vaccine received. Both vaccines were well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT03025750 and NCT03671616.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
Reference Key
sezllorens2020immunogenicityvaccine Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Sáez-Llorens, Xavier;Thierry-Carstensen, Birgit;Stoey, Lina Saem;Sørensen, Charlotte;Wachmann, Henrik;Bandyopadhyay, Ananda S;Nielsen, Pernille Ingemann;Kusk, Mie Vestergaard;
Journal Vaccine
Year 2020
DOI
S0264-410X(20)30295-4
URL
Keywords
immunogenicity polio affordable ipv aluminium hydroxide adjuvant booster vaccination primary vaccination standalone adjuvanted ipv

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.