Evaluation of the immunogenicity and safety of different doses and formulations of a broad spectrum influenza vaccine (FLU-v) developed by SEEK:study protocol for a single-center, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled clinical phase IIb trial

BACKGROUND: Current influenza vaccines, based on antibodies against surface antigens, are unable to provide protection against newly emerging virus strains which differ from the vaccine strains. Therefore the population has to be re-vaccinated annually. It is thus important to develop vaccines which induce protective immunity to a broad spectrum of influenza viruses. This trial is designed to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of FLU-v, a vaccine composed of four synthetic peptides with conserved epitopes from influenza A and B strains expected to elicit both cell mediated immunity (CMI) and humoral immunity providing protection against a broad spectrum of influenza viruses.METHODS: In a single-center, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled phase IIb trial, 222 healthy volunteers aged 18-60 years will be randomized (2:2:1:1) to receive two injections of a suspension of 500 μg FLU-v in saline (arm 1), one dose of emulsified 500 μg FLU-v in Montanide ISA-51 and water for injection (WFI) followed by one saline dose (arm 2), two saline doses (arm 3), or one dose of Montanide ISA-51 and WFI emulsion followed by one saline dose (arm 4). All injections will be given subcutaneously. Primary endpoints are safety and FLU-v induced CMI, evaluated by cytokine production by antigen specific T cell populations (flow-cytometry and ELISA). Secondary outcomes are measurements of antibody responses (ELISA and multiplex), whereas exploratory outcomes include clinical efficacy and additional CMI assays (ELISpot) to show cross-reactivity.DISCUSSION: Broadly protective influenza vaccines able to provide protection against multiple strains of influenza are urgently needed. FLU-v is a promising vaccine which has shown to trigger the cell-mediated immune response. The dosages and formulations tested in this current trial are also estimated to induce antibody response. Therefore, both cellular and humoral immune responses will be evaluated.TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number 2015-001932-38 ; retrospectively registered clinicaltrials.gov NCT02962908 (November 7th 2016).</p

Immunogenicity, Safety, and Efficacy of a Standalone Universal Influenza Vaccine, FLU-v, in Healthy Adults

Background: FLU-v is a broad-spectrum influenza vaccine that induces antibodies and cell-mediated immunity. Objective: To compare the safety, immunogenicity, and exploratory efficacy of different formulations and dosing regimens of FLU-v versus placebo. Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-center phase 2b clinical trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02962908; Eudra CT: 2015-001932-38) Setting: The Netherlands. Participants: 175 healthy adults aged 18 to 60 years. Intervention: 0.5-mL subcutaneous injection of 500 mu g of adjuvanted (1 dose) or nonadjuvanted (2 doses) FLU-v (A-FLU-v or NA-FLU-v) or adjuvanted or nonadjuvanted placebo (A-placebo or NA-placebo) (2:2:1:1 ratio). Measurements: Vaccine-specific cellular responses at days 0, 42, and 180 were assessed via flow cytometry and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Solicited information on adverse events (AEs) was collected for 21 days after vaccination. Unsolicited information on AEs was collected throughout the study. Results: The AEs with the highest incidence were mild to moderate injection site reactions. The difference between A-FLU-v and A-placebo in the median fold increase in secreted interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) was 38.2-fold (95% CI, 4.7- to 69.7-fold; P = 0.001) at day 42 and 25.0-fold (CI, 5.7- to 50.9-fold; P <0.001) at day 180. The differences between A-FLU-v and A-placebo in median fold increase at day 42 were 4.5-fold (CI, 2.3- to 9.8-fold; P <0.001) for IFN-gamma-producing CD4+ T cells, 4.9-fold (CI, 1.3- to 40.0-fold; P <0.001) for tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), 7.0-fold (CI, 3.5- to 18.0-fold; P <0.001) for interleukin-2 (IL-2), and 1.7-fold (CI, 0.1- to 4.0-fold; P = 0.004) for CD107a. At day 180, differences were 2.1-fold (CI, 0.0- to 6.0-fold; P = 0.030) for IFN-gamma and 5.7-fold (CI, 2.0- to 15.0-fold; P <0.001) for IL-2, with no difference for TNF-alpha or CD107a. No differences were seen between NA-FLU-v and NA-placebo. Limitation: The study was not powered to evaluate vaccine efficacy against influenza infection. Conclusion: Adjuvanted FLU-v is immunogenic and merits phase 3 development to explore efficacy. Primary Funding Source: SEEK and the European Commission Directorate-General for Research and Innovation, European Member States within the UNISEC (Universal Influenza Vaccines Secured) project

FLU-v, a Broad-Spectrum Influenza Vaccine, Induces Cross-Reactive Cellular Immune Responses in Humans Measured by Dual IFN-γ and Granzyme B ELISpot Assay

Previous reports demonstrated that FLU-v, a peptide-based broad-spectrum influenza vaccine candidate, induced antibody and cellular immune responses in humans. Here, we evaluate cellular effector functions and cross-reactivity. PBMC sampled pre- (day 0) and post-vaccination (days 42 and 180) from vaccine (n = 58) and placebo (n = 27) recipients were tested in vitro for responses to FLU-v and inactivated influenza strains (A/H3N2, A/H1N1, A/H5N1, A/H7N9, B/Yamagata) using IFN-γ and granzyme B ELISpot. FLU-v induced a significant increase in the number of IFN-γ- and granzyme-B-secreting cells responding to the vaccine antigens from pre-vaccination (medians: 5 SFU/106 cells for both markers) to day 42 (125 and 40 SFU/106 cells, p 6 cells, p p = 0.0047). The fold increase from pre-vaccination to day 42 for IFN-γ-, granzyme-B-, and double-positive-secreting cells responding to FLU-v was significantly elevated compared to placebo (medians: 16.3-fold vs. 1.0-fold, p p p = 0.0012, respectively). Stimulation of PBMC with inactivated influenza strains showed significantly higher fold increases from pre-vaccination to day 42 in the vaccine group compared to placebo for IFN-γ-secreting cells reacting to H1N1 (medians: 2.3-fold vs. 0.8-fold, p = 0.0083), H3N2 (1.7-fold vs. 0.8-fold, p = 0.0178), and H5N1 (1.7-fold vs. 1.0-fold, p = 0.0441); for granzyme B secreting cells reacting to H1N1 (3.5-fold vs. 1.0-fold, p = 0.0075); and for double positive cells reacting to H1N1 (2.9-fold vs. 1.0-fold, p = 0.0219), H3N2 (1.7-fold vs. 0.9-fold, p = 0.0136), and the B strain (2.0-fold vs. 0.8-fold, p = 0.0227). The correlation observed between number of cells secreting IFN-γ or granzyme B in response to FLU-v and to the influenza strains supported vaccine-induced cross-reactivity. In conclusion, adjuvanted FLU-v vaccination induced cross-reactive cellular responses with cytotoxic capacity, further supporting the development of FLU-v as a broad-spectrum influenza vaccine

Academic Domains as Political Battlegrounds: A Global Enquiry by 99 Academics in the Fields of Education and Technology

This article theorizes the functional relationship between the human components (i.e., scholars) and nonhuman components (i.e., structural configurations) of academic domains. It is organized around the following question: in what ways have scholars formed and been formed by the structural configurations of their academic domain? The article uses as a case study the academic domain of education and technology to examine this question. Its authorship approach is innovative, with a worldwide collection of academics (99 authors) collaborating to address the proposed question based on their reflections on daily social and academic practices. This collaboration followed a three-round process of contributions via email. Analysis of these scholars’ reflective accounts was carried out, and a theoretical proposition was established from this analysis. The proposition is of a mutual (yet not necessarily balanced) power (and therefore political) relationship between the human and non-human constituents of an academic realm, with the two shaping one another. One implication of this proposition is that these non-human elements exist as political ‘actors’, just like their human counterparts, having ‘agency’ – which they exercise over humans. This turns academic domains into political (functional or dysfunctional) ‘battlefields’ wherein both humans and non-humans engage in political activities and actions that form the identity of the academic domain