Safety and immunogenicity of a parenteral P2-VP8-P[8] subunit rotavirus vaccine in toddlers and infants in South Africa : a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND Efficacy of live oral rotavirus vaccines is reduced in low-income compared with high-income settings. Parenteral non-replicating rotavirus vaccines might offer benefits over oral vaccines. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the P2-VP8-P[8] subunit rotavirus vaccine at different doses in South African toddlers and infants. Methods This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation trial was done at a single research unit based at a hospital in South Africa in healthy HIV-uninfected toddlers (aged 2 to <3 years) and term infants (aged 6 to <8 weeks, without previous rotavirus vaccination). Block randomisation (computer-generated, electronic allocation) was used to assign eligible toddlers (in a 6:1 ratio) and infants (in a 3:1 ratio) in each dose cohort (10 μg, followed by 30 μg, then 60 μg if doses tolerated) to parenteral P2-VP8-P[8] subunit rotavirus or placebo injection. The two highest tolerated doses were then assessed in an expanded cohort (in a 1:1:1 ratio). Parents of participants and clinical, data, and laboratory staff were masked to treatment assignment. P2-VP8-P[8] vaccine versus placebo was assessed first in toddlers (single injection) and then in infants (three injections 4 weeks apart). The primary safety endpoints were local and systemic reactions within 7 days after each injection, adverse events within 28 days after each injection, and all serious adverse events, assessed in toddlers and infants who received at least one dose. In infants receiving all study injections, primary immunogenicity endpoints were anti-P2-VP8-P[8] IgA and IgG and neutralising antibody seroresponses and geometric mean titres 4 weeks after the third injection. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02109484. FINDINGS Between March 17, 2014, and Sept 29, 2014, 42 toddlers (36 to vaccine and six to placebo) and 48 infants (36 to vaccine and 12 to placebo) were enrolled in the dose-escalation phase, in which the 30 μg and 60 μg doses where found to be the highest tolerated doses. A further 114 infants were enrolled in the expanded cohort between Nov 3, 2014, and March 20, 2015, and all 162 infants (12 assigned to 10 μg, 50 to 30 μg, 50 to 60 μg, and 50 to placebo) were included in the safety analysis. Serum IgA seroresponses were observed in 38 (81%, 95% CI 67–91) of 47 infants in the 30 μg group and 32 (68%, 53–81) of 47 in the 60 μg group, compared with nine (20%, 10–35) of 45 in the placebo group; adjusted IgG seroresponses were seen in 46 (98%, 89–100) of 47 infants in the 30 μg group and 47 (100%; 92–100) of 47 in the 60 μg group, compared with four (9%, 2·5–21) of 45 in the placebo group; and adjusted neutralising antibody seroresponses against the homologous Wa-strain were seen in 40 (85%, 72–94) of 47 infants in both the 30 μg and 60 μg groups, compared with three (7%, 1·4–18) of 45 participants in the placebo group. Solicited reactions following any injection occurred with similar frequency and severity in participants receiving vaccine and those receiving placebo. Unsolicited adverse events were mostly mild and occurred at a similar frequency between groups. Eight serious adverse events (one with placebo, two with 30 μg, and five with 60 μg) occurred in seven infants within 28 days of any study injection, none of which were deemed related to study treatment. INTERPRETATION The parenteral P2-VP8-P[8] vaccine was well tolerated and immunogenic in infants, providing a novel approach to vaccination against rotavirus disease. On the basis of these results, a phase 1/2 trial of a trivalent P2-VP8 (P[4], P[6], and P[8]) subunit vaccine is underway at three sites in South Africa.Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.MJG reports funding from PATH Vaccine Solutions and personal fees from GlaxoSmithKline. AK and LJ report funding from PATH Vaccine Solutions. NP reports honoraria from GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Aspen Pharma. SAM reports grants from PATH, grants from Novartis and GlaxoSmithKline, and grants and personal fees from Pfizer and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. MM reports laboratory service agreements with PATH, Merck, and GlaxoSmithKline. IC reports funding from PATH and is a paid consultant for PATH. MP is an employee of PATH, and reports grants from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. AF, JF, LD, and SC declare no competing interests.http://www.thelancet.com/infectionam2017Medical Virolog

A comparative phase I study of combination, homologous subtype-C DNA, MVA, and Env gp140 protein/adjuvant HIV vaccines in two immunization regimes

There remains an urgent need for a prophylactic HIV vaccine. We compared combined MVA and adjuvanted gp140 to sequential MVA/gp140 after DNA priming. We expected Env-specific CD4+ T-cells after DNA and MVA priming, and Env-binding antibodies in 100% individuals after boosting with gp140 and that combined vaccines would not compromise safety and might augment immunogenicity. Forty volunteers were primed three times with DNA plasmids encoding (CN54) env and (ZM96) gag-pol-nef at 0, 4 and 8 weeks then boosted with MVA-C (CN54 env and gag-pol-nef) and glucopyranosyl lipid adjuvant-aqueous formulation (GLA-AF) adjuvanted CN54gp140. They were randomised to receive them in combination at the same visit at 16 and 20 weeks (accelerated) or sequentially with MVA-C at 16, 20, and GLA-AF/gp140 at 24 and 28 weeks (standard). All vaccinations were intramuscular. Primary outcomes included ≥grade 3 safety events and the titer of CN54gp140-specific binding IgG. Other outcomes included neutralization, binding antibody specificity and T-cell responses. Two participants experienced asymptomatic ≥grade 3 transaminitis leading to discontinuation of vaccinations, and three had grade 3 solicited local or systemic reactions. A total of 100% made anti-CN54gp140 IgG and combining vaccines did not significantly alter the response; geometric mean titer 6424 (accelerated) and 6578 (standard); neutralization of MW965.2 Tier 1 pseudovirus was superior in the standard group (82 versus 45% responders,  = 0.04). T-cell ELISpot responses were CD4+ and Env-dominant; 85 and 82% responding in the accelerated and standard groups, respectively. Vaccine-induced IgG responses targeted multiple regions within gp120 with the V3 region most immunodominant and no differences between groups detected. Combining MVA and gp140 vaccines did not result in increased adverse events and did not significantly impact upon the titer of Env-specific binding antibodies, which were seen in 100% individuals. The approach did however affect other immune responses; neutralizing antibody responses, seen only to Tier 1 pseudoviruses, were poorer when the vaccines were combined and while T-cell responses were seen in >80% individuals in both groups and similarly CD4 and Env dominant, their breadth/polyfunctionality tended to be lower when the vaccines were combined, suggesting attenuation of immunogenicity and cautioning against this accelerated regimen

Safety and immunogenicity of a parenteral trivalent P2-VP8 subunit rotavirus vaccine : a multisite, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND : A monovalent, parenteral, subunit rotavirus vaccine was well tolerated and immunogenic in adults in the USA and in toddlers and infants in South Africa, but elicited poor responses against heterotypic rotavirus strains. We aimed to evaluate safety and immunogenicity of a trivalent vaccine formulation (P2-VP8-P[4],[6],[8]). METHODS : A double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation, phase 1/2 study was done at three South African research sites. Healthy adults (aged 18–45 years), toddlers (aged 2–3 years), and infants (aged 6–8 weeks, ≥37 weeks’ gestation, and without previous receipt of rotavirus vaccination), all without HIV infection, were eligible for enrolment. In the dose-escalation phase, adults and toddlers were randomly assigned in blocks (block size of five) to receive 30 μg or 90 μg of vaccine, or placebo, and infants were randomly assigned in blocks (block size of four) to receive 15 μg, 30 μg, or 90 μg of vaccine, or placebo. In the expanded phase, infants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive 15 μg, 30 μg, or 90 μg of vaccine, or placebo, in block sizes of four. Participants, parents of participants, and clinical, data, and laboratory staff were masked to treatment assignment. Adults received an intramuscular injection of vaccine or placebo in the deltoid muscle on the day of randomisation (day 0), day 28, and day 56; toddlers received a single injection of vaccine or placebo in the anterolateral thigh on day 0. Infants in both phases received an injection of vaccine or placebo in the anterolateral thigh on days 0, 28, and 56, at approximately 6, 10, and 14 weeks of age. Primary safety endpoints were local and systemic reactions (grade 2 or worse) within 7 days and adverse events and serious adverse events within 28 days after each injection in all participants who received at least one injection. Primary immunogenicity endpoints were analysed in infants in either phase who received all planned injections, had blood samples analysed at the relevant timepoints, and presented no major protocol violations considered to have an effect on the immunogenicity results of the study, and included serum anti-P2-VP8 IgA, IgG, and neutralising antibody geometric mean titres and responses measured 4 weeks after the final injection in vaccine compared with placebo groups. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02646891. FINDINGS : Between Feb 15, 2016, and Dec 22, 2017, 30 adults (12 each in the 30 μg and 90 μg groups and six in the placebo group), 30 toddlers (12 each in the 30 μg and 90 μg groups and six in the placebo group), and 557 infants (139 in the 15 μg group, 140 in the 30 μg group, 139 in the 90 μg group, and 139 in the placebo group) were randomly assigned, received at least one dose, and were assessed for safety. There were no significant differences in local or systemic adverse events, or unsolicited adverse events, between vaccine and placebo groups. There were no serious adverse events within 28 days of injection in adults, whereas one serious adverse event occurred in a toddler (febrile convulsion in the 30 μg group) and 23 serious adverse events (four in placebo, ten in 15 μg, four in 30 μg, and five in 90 μg groups) occurred among 20 infants, most commonly respiratory tract infections. One death occurred in an infant within 28 days of injection due to pneumococcal meningitis. In 528 infants (130 in placebo, 132 in 15 μg, 132 in 30 μg, and 134 in 90 μg groups), adjusted anti-P2-VP8 IgG seroresponses (≥4-fold increase from baseline) to P[4], P[6], and P[8] antigens were significantly higher in the 15 μg, 30 μg, and 90 μg groups (99–100%) than in the placebo group (10–29%; p<0·0001). Although significantly higher than in placebo recipients (9–10%), anti-P2-VP8 IgA seroresponses (≥4-fold increase from baseline) to each individual antigen were modest (20–34%) across the 15 μg, 30 μg, and 90 μg groups. Adjusted neutralising antibody seroresponses in infants (≥2·7-fold increase from baseline) to DS-1 (P[4]), 1076 (P[6]), and Wa (P[8]) were higher in vaccine recipients than in placebo recipients: p<0·0001 for all comparisons. INTERPRETATION : The trivalent P2-VP8 vaccine was well tolerated, with promising anti-P2-VP8 IgG and neutralising antibody responses across the three vaccine P types. Our findings support advancing the vaccine to efficacy testing.The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundationhttp://www.thelancet.comam2020Medical Virolog

Phase 1 Safety and Immunogenicity Evaluation of ADMVA, a Multigenic, Modified Vaccinia Ankara-HIV-1 B'/C Candidate Vaccine

in a modified vaccinia Ankara viral vector. Sequences were derived from a prevalent circulating HIV-1 recombinant form in Yunnan, China, an area of high HIV incidence. The objective was to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of ADMVA in human volunteers.. Two volunteers mounted antibodies that were able to neutralize clade-matched viruses.ADMVA was well-tolerated and elicited durable humoral and cellular immune responses

Use of ChAd3-EBO-Z Ebola virus vaccine in Malian and US adults, and boosting of Malian adults with MVA-BN-Filo: a phase 1, single-blind, randomised trial, a phase 1b, open-label and double-blind, dose-escalation trial, and a nested, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

SummaryBackgroundThe 2014 west African Zaire Ebola virus epidemic prompted worldwide partners to accelerate clinical development of replication-defective chimpanzee adenovirus 3 vector vaccine expressing Zaire Ebola virus glycoprotein (ChAd3-EBO-Z). We aimed to investigate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of ChAd3-EBO-Z in Malian and US adults, and assess the effect of boosting of Malians with modified vaccinia Ankara expressing Zaire Ebola virus glycoprotein and other filovirus antigens (MVA-BN-Filo).MethodsIn the phase 1, single-blind, randomised trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in the USA, we recruited adults aged 18–65 years from the University of Maryland medical community and the Baltimore community. In the phase 1b, open-label and double-blind, dose-escalation trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in Mali, we recruited adults 18–50 years of age from six hospitals and health centres in Bamako (Mali), some of whom were also eligible for a nested, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of MVA-BN-Filo. For randomised segments of the Malian trial and for the US trial, we randomly allocated participants (1:1; block size of six [Malian] or four [US]; ARB produced computer-generated randomisation lists; clinical staff did randomisation) to different single doses of intramuscular immunisation with ChAd3-EBO-Z: Malians received 1 × 1010 viral particle units (pu), 2·5 × 1010 pu, 5 × 1010 pu, or 1 × 1011 pu; US participants received 1 × 1010 pu or 1 × 1011 pu. We randomly allocated Malians in the nested trial (1:1) to receive a single dose of 2 × 108 plaque-forming units of MVA-BN-Filo or saline placebo. In the double-blind segments of the Malian trial, investigators, clinical staff, participants, and immunology laboratory staff were masked, but the study pharmacist (MK), vaccine administrator, and study statistician (ARB) were unmasked. In the US trial, investigators were not masked, but participants were. Analyses were per protocol. The primary outcome was safety, measured with occurrence of adverse events for 7 days after vaccination. Both trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02231866 (US) and NCT02267109 (Malian).FindingsBetween Oct 8, 2014, and Feb 16, 2015, we randomly allocated 91 participants in Mali (ten [11%] to 1 × 1010 pu, 35 [38%] to 2·5 × 1010 pu, 35 [38%] to 5 × 1010 pu, and 11 [12%] to 1 × 1011 pu) and 20 in the USA (ten [50%] to 1 × 1010 pu and ten [50%] to 1 × 1011 pu), and boosted 52 Malians with MVA-BN-Filo (27 [52%]) or saline (25 [48%]). We identified no safety concerns with either vaccine: seven (8%) of 91 participants in Mali (five [5%] received 5 × 1010 and two [2%] received 1 × 1011 pu) and four (20%) of 20 in the USA (all received 1 × 1011 pu) given ChAd3-EBO-Z had fever lasting for less than 24 h, and 15 (56%) of 27 Malians boosted with MVA-BN-Filo had injection-site pain or tenderness.Interpretation1 × 1011 pu single-dose ChAd3-EBO-Z could suffice for phase 3 efficacy trials of ring-vaccination containment needing short-term, high-level protection to interrupt transmission. MVA-BN-Filo boosting, although a complex regimen, could confer long-lived protection if needed (eg, for health-care workers).FundingWellcome Trust, Medical Research Council UK, Department for International Development UK, National Cancer Institute, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Federal Funds from National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases

Safety and Immunogenicity of DNA and MVA HIV-1 Subtype C Vaccine Prime-Boost Regimens: A Phase I Randomised Trial in HIV-Uninfected Indian Volunteers

STUDY DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo controlled phase I trial. METHODS: The trial was conducted in 32 HIV-uninfected healthy volunteers to assess the safety and immunogenicity of prime-boost vaccination regimens with either 2 doses of ADVAX, a DNA vaccine containing Chinese HIV-1 subtype C env gp160, gag, pol and nef/tat genes, as a prime and 2 doses of TBC-M4, a recombinant MVA encoding Indian HIV-1 subtype C env gp160, gag, RT, rev, tat, and nef genes, as a boost in Group A or 3 doses of TBC-M4 alone in Group B participants. Out of 16 participants in each group, 12 received vaccine candidates and 4 received placebos. RESULTS: Both vaccine regimens were found to be generally safe and well tolerated. The breadth of anti-HIV binding antibodies and the titres of anti-HIV neutralizing antibodies were significantly higher (p<0.05) in Group B volunteers at 14 days post last vaccination. Neutralizing antibodies were detected mainly against Tier-1 subtype B and C viruses. HIV-specific IFN-γ ELISPOT responses were directed mostly to Env and Gag proteins. Although the IFN-γ ELISPOT responses were infrequent after ADVAX vaccinations, the response rate was significantly higher in group A after 1(st) and 2(nd) MVA doses as compared to the responses in group B volunteers. However, the priming effect was short lasting leading to no difference in the frequency, breadth and magnitude of IFN-γELISPOT responses between the groups at 3, 6 and 9 months post-last vaccination. CONCLUSIONS: Although DNA priming resulted in enhancement of immune responses after 1(st) MVA boosting, the overall DNA prime MVA boost was not found to be immunologically superior to homologous MVA boosting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trial Registry CTRI/2009/091/00005

Phase 1 Safety and Immunogenicity Evaluation of ADVAX, a Multigenic, DNA-Based Clade C/B' HIV-1 Candidate Vaccine

BACKGROUND: We conducted a Phase I dose escalation trial of ADVAX, a DNA-based candidate HIV-1 vaccine expressing Clade C/B' env, gag, pol, nef, and tat genes. Sequences were derived from a prevalent circulating recombinant form in Yunnan, China, an area of high HIV-1 incidence. The objective was to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of ADVAX in human volunteers. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: ADVAX or placebo was administered intramuscularly at months 0, 1 and 3 to 45 healthy volunteers not at high risk for HIV-1. Three dosage levels [0.2 mg (low), 1.0 mg (mid), and 4.0 mg (high)] were tested. Twelve volunteers in each dosage group were assigned to receive ADVAX and three to receive placebo in a double-blind design. Subjects were followed for local and systemic reactogenicity, adverse events, and clinical laboratory parameters. Study follow up was 18 months. Humoral immunogenicity was evaluated by anti-gp120 binding ELISA. Cellular immunogenicity was assessed by a validated IFNgamma ELISpot assay and intracellular cytokine staining. ADVAX was safe and well-tolerated, with no vaccine-related serious adverse events. Local and systemic reactogenicity events were reported by 64% and 42% of vaccine recipients, respectively. The majority of events were mild. The IFNgamma ELISpot response rates to any HIV antigen were 0/9 (0%) in the placebo group, 3/12 (25%) in the low-dosage group, 4/12 (33%) in the mid-dosage group, and 2/12 (17%) in the high-dosage group. Overall, responses were generally transient and occurred to each gene product, although volunteers responded to single antigens only. Binding antibodies to gp120 were not detected in any volunteers, and HIV seroconversion did not occur. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: ADVAX delivered intramuscularly is safe, well-tolerated, and elicits modest but transient cellular immune responses. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00249106.published_or_final_versio

Baseline Morbidity in 2,990 Adult African Volunteers Recruited to Characterize Laboratory Reference Intervals for Future HIV Vaccine Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND: An understanding of the health of potential volunteers in Africa is essential for the safe and efficient conduct of clinical trials, particularly for trials of preventive technologies such as vaccines that enroll healthy individuals. Clinical safety laboratory values used for screening, enrolment and follow-up of African clinical trial volunteers have largely been based on values derived from industrialized countries in Europe and North America. This report describes baseline morbidity during recruitment for a multi-center, African laboratory reference intervals study. METHODS: Asymptomatic persons, aged 18-60 years, were invited to participate in a cross-sectional study at seven sites (Kigali, Rwanda; Masaka and Entebbe, Uganda; Kangemi, Kenyatta National Hospital and Kilifi, Kenya; and Lusaka, Zambia). Gender equivalency was by design. Individuals who were acutely ill, pregnant, menstruating, or had significant clinical findings were not enrolled. Each volunteer provided blood for hematology, immunology, and biochemistry parameters and urine for urinalysis. Enrolled volunteers were excluded if found to be positive for HIV, syphilis or Hepatitis B and C. Laboratory assays were conducted under Good Clinical Laboratory Practices (GCLP). RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Of the 2990 volunteers who were screened, 2387 (80%) were enrolled, and 2107 (71%) were included in the analysis (52% men, 48% women). Major reasons for screening out volunteers included abnormal findings on physical examination (228/603, 38%), significant medical history (76, 13%) and inability to complete the informed consent process (73, 13%). Once enrolled, principle reasons for exclusion from analysis included detection of Hepatitis B surface antigen (106/280, 38%) and antibodies against Hepatitis C (95, 34%). This is the first large scale, multi-site study conducted to the standards of GCLP to describe African laboratory reference intervals applicable to potential volunteers in clinical trials. Approximately one-third of all potential volunteers screened were not eligible for analysis; the majority were excluded for medical reasons

CLSI-Derived Hematology and Biochemistry Reference Intervals for Healthy Adults in Eastern and Southern Africa

BACKGROUND: Clinical laboratory reference intervals have not been established in many African countries, and non-local intervals are commonly used in clinical trials to screen and monitor adverse events (AEs) among African participants. Using laboratory reference intervals derived from other populations excludes potential trial volunteers in Africa and makes AE assessment challenging. The objective of this study was to establish clinical laboratory reference intervals for 25 hematology, immunology and biochemistry values among healthy African adults typical of those who might join a clinical trial. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Equal proportions of men and women were invited to participate in a cross sectional study at seven clinical centers (Kigali, Rwanda; Masaka and Entebbe, Uganda; two in Nairobi and one in Kilifi, Kenya; and Lusaka, Zambia). All laboratories used hematology, immunology and biochemistry analyzers validated by an independent clinical laboratory. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines were followed to create study consensus intervals. For comparison, AE grading criteria published by the U.S. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Division of AIDS (DAIDS) and other U.S. reference intervals were used. 2,990 potential volunteers were screened, and 2,105 (1,083 men and 1,022 women) were included in the analysis. While some significant gender and regional differences were observed, creating consensus African study intervals from the complete data was possible for 18 of the 25 analytes. Compared to reference intervals from the U.S., we found lower hematocrit and hemoglobin levels, particularly among women, lower white blood cell and neutrophil counts, and lower amylase. Both genders had elevated eosinophil counts, immunoglobulin G, total and direct bilirubin, lactate dehydrogenase and creatine phosphokinase, the latter being more pronounced among women. When graded against U.S. -derived DAIDS AE grading criteria, we observed 774 (35.3%) volunteers with grade one or higher results; 314 (14.9%) had elevated total bilirubin, and 201 (9.6%) had low neutrophil counts. These otherwise healthy volunteers would be excluded or would require special exemption to participate in many clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: To accelerate clinical trials in Africa, and to improve their scientific validity, locally appropriate reference ranges should be used. This study provides ranges that will inform inclusion criteria and evaluation of adverse events for studies in these regions of Africa

Safety and Immunogenicity Study of Multiclade HIV-1 Adenoviral Vector Vaccine Alone or as Boost following a Multiclade HIV-1 DNA Vaccine in Africa

We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled Phase I study of a recombinant replication-defective adenovirus type 5 (rAd5) vector expressing HIV-1 Gag and Pol from subtype B and Env from subtypes A, B and C, given alone or as boost following a DNA plasmid vaccine expressing the same HIV-1 proteins plus Nef, in 114 healthy HIV-uninfected African adults.Volunteers were randomized to 4 groups receiving the rAd5 vaccine intramuscularly at dosage levels of 1×10(10) or 1×10(11) particle units (PU) either alone or as boost following 3 injections of the DNA vaccine given at 4 mg/dose intramuscularly by needle-free injection using Biojector® 2000. Safety and immunogenicity were evaluated for 12 months. Both vaccines were well-tolerated. Overall, 62% and 86% of vaccine recipients in the rAd5 alone and DNA prime - rAd5 boost groups, respectively, responded to the HIV-1 proteins by an interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) ELISPOT. The frequency of immune responses was independent of rAd5 dosage levels. The highest frequency of responses after rAd5 alone was detected at 6 weeks; after DNA prime - rAd5 boost, at 6 months (end of study). At baseline, neutralizing antibodies against Ad5 were present in 81% of volunteers; the distribution was similar across the 4 groups. Pre-existing immunity to Ad5 did not appear to have a significant impact on reactogenicity or immune response rates to HIV antigens by IFN-γ ELISPOT. Binding antibodies against Env were detected in up to 100% recipients of DNA prime - rAd5 boost. One volunteer acquired HIV infection after the study ended, two years after receipt of rAd5 alone.The HIV-1 rAd5 vaccine, either alone or as a boost following HIV-1 DNA vaccine, was well-tolerated and immunogenic in African adults. DNA priming increased the frequency and magnitude of cellular and humoral immune responses, but there was no effect of rAd5 dosage on immunogenicity endpoints.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00124007