32 research outputs found

    ELISA responses among the different groups after priming by route and vaccine indicated on X-axis (A) and boosting with rAd5 IM (B).

    No full text
    <p>The numbers above each boxplot represent the fraction of participants in each group with available data at that time point who were judged to be responders using predefined criteria. The responders are represented on the plot with red dots, and are used to construct the boxplots; blue points represent non-responders and are not included in the boxplots.</p

    ELISpot responses among the different groups after priming with vaccine and route indicated on X-axis (panel A) and after rAd5 boosting IM (panel B).

    No full text
    <p>The numbers above each boxplot represent the fraction of participants in each group with available data at that time point who were judged to be responders using predefined criteria. The responders are represented on the plot with red dots, and are used to construct the boxplots; blue points represent non-responders and are not included in the boxplots.</p

    Frequency of Vaccine-Induced Seropositivity/Reactivity Through Study Week 42.

    No full text
    <p>Subjects were tested at weeks 12, 30 and 42 regardless of the number of vaccines completed. This shows frequency of a “reactive EIA” using a commercial diagnostic kit (Abbott HIV-1/HIV-2 rDNA) at any time during the study. Western blot was performed only for samples with positive EIA. HIV uninfected status was confirmed by RNA PCR tests, which were consistently negative for all subjects throughout the study.</p

    ICS responses among the different priming groups after boosting with rAd5 IM for CD4 T cells (A) and CD8 T cells (B).

    No full text
    <p>The numbers above each boxplot represent the fraction of participants in each group with available data at that time point who were judged to be responders using predefined positivitycriteria. The responders are represented on the plot with red dots, and are used to construct the boxplots; blue points represent non-responders and are not included in the boxplots.</p

    Phase I Randomized Clinical Trial of VRC DNA and rAd5 HIV-1 Vaccine Delivery by Intramuscular (IM), Subcutaneous (SC) and Intradermal (ID) Administration (VRC 011)

    No full text
    <div><p>Background</p><p>Phase 1 evaluation of the VRC HIV DNA and rAd5 vaccines delivered intramuscularly (IM) supported proceeding to a Phase 2 b efficacy study. Here we report comparison of the IM, subcutaneous (SC) and intradermal (ID) routes of administration.</p><p>Methods</p><p>Sixty subjects were randomized to 6 schedules to evaluate the IM, SC or ID route for prime injections. Three schedules included DNA primes (Wks 0,4,8) and 3 schedules included rAd5 prime (Wk0); all included rAd5 IM boost (Wk24). DNA vaccine dosage was 4 mg IM or SC, but 0.4 mg ID, while all rAd5 vaccinations were 10<sup>10</sup> PU. All injections were administered by needle and syringe.</p><p>Results</p><p>Overall, 27/30 subjects completed 3 DNA primes; 30/30 subjects completed rAd5 primes. Mild local pruritus (itchiness), superficial skin lesions and injection site nodules were associated with ID and SC, but not IM injections. All routes induced T-cell and antibody immune responses after rAd5 boosting. Overall, >95% had Env antibody and >80% had Env T-cell responses.</p><p>Conclusions</p><p>The pattern of local reactogenicity following ID and SC injections differed from IM injections but all routes were well-tolerated. There was no evidence of an immunogenicity advantage following SC or ID delivery, supporting IM delivery as the preferred route of administration.</p><p>Trial Registration</p><p><a href="http://tinyurl.com/muzmnub" target="_blank">Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00321061</a></p></div
    corecore