Showing posts with label LAIV. Show all posts
Showing posts with label LAIV. Show all posts

Monday, October 14, 2013

URMC Outlines H7N9 LAIV Trials

image

Photo Credit CDC PHIL 

 

 


# 7858

 

The University of Rochester Medical Center has announced their plans to conduct a series of human trials of a live attenuated H7N9 vaccine delivered via a nasal spray (similar to Medimmune’s FluMist ®) over the coming months, and is actively enrolling (paid) volunteers.  

 

Due to the use of a live-attenuated virus, recipients must agree to be isolated for 12 days following receipt of the vaccine to prevent inadvertent spread of the virus to others. While those risks are believed low, the CDC’s Q&A on LAIV (Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccines) states:

 

Can people receiving the nasal spray flu vaccine pass the vaccine viruses to others?

Yes, but its rare. Data indicate that both children and adults vaccinated with nasal spray can shed vaccine viruses after vaccination, although in lower amounts than occur typically with shedding of wild-type influenza viruses. Rarely, shed vaccine viruses can be transmitted from vaccine recipients to unvaccinated persons. However, serious illnesses have not been reported among unvaccinated persons who have been infected inadvertently with vaccine viruses.

See Prevention and Control of Seasonal Influenza with Vaccines: Recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices – United States, 2013-14: Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccines: Shedding, Transmission, and Stability of Vaccine Viruses for more information.

 

If a virus is already circulating in a community – as with seasonal flu - then there is little harm in using a LAIV.  But since H7N9 is not currently circulating in North America, anyone receiving the vaccine must be isolated as long as they are capable of shedding the virus, even if the risks of transmission are very low.

 

Forty-eight volunteers are being sought, with some receiving a live virus vaccine, followed several weeks later with an inactivated booster (thus requiring only one  isolation period), and others receiving a live vaccine followed by a live booster (requiring two isolation periods).

 

 

My thanks to @makoto_au_japon for tweeting the link to this story via the University of Rochester Newsroom.

 

 

 

URMC Enrolling Subjects to Test H7N9 Pandemic Bird Flu Vaccines

October 14, 2013

 

URMC researchers are recruiting 48 participants for an isolation-style study testing live-virus bird flu vaccines later this fall.

 

The project will test two different schedules of nasal vaccine and boosters, hoping to shed light on which approach does a better job priming the immune system against H7N9, a new strain of bird flu identified in China in April this year.

 

“In a pandemic, time is of the essence,” said study investigator John Treanor, M.D., an internationally known flu expert who heads the University’s Vaccine Research Unit. “While no cases of H7N9 have yet been identified in the U.S., the Centers for Disease Control is following the situation closely and taking precautionary action, developing and testing a candidate vaccine in case it was ever needed.”

 

For the study, participants will be assigned to one of two groups. The first will receive intranasal vaccine (containing a live, weakened version of the H7N9 virus) and spend 12 days in a local isolation facility. Several weeks later, they would receive a booster shot of inactivated H7N9 in an outpatient setting.

 

The second group would follow a similar schedule, but would receive an additional dose of intranasal vaccine—requiring an additional 12-day isolation stay—just 28 days after the initial dose. Then, several weeks later, they also would receive a booster of live, inactivated H7N9 in an outpatient clinic.

 

Scientists in the lab will watch how strongly each of the two vaccine schedules triggers the production of protective proteins, called antibodies, in participants. Treanor and his team hope that the findings will shed light on whether one schedule or the other produces more favorable immune response—information that could guide CDC officials charged with shaping clinical recommendations in the face of a pandemic.

 

The research is funded by the National Institutes of Health, using experimental vaccines manufactured by MedImmune (makers of seasonal FluMist®) and Sanofi.

(Continue . . . )

 

Currently, LAIV nasal spray vaccines are only approved for people who fall into specific categories.  Again, from the CDC.

 

Who can be vaccinated with the nasal spray flu vaccine

The nasal spray is approved for use in healthy* people 2 through 49 years of age who are not pregnant.

Who should not be vaccinated with the nasal spray flu vaccine?

  • Children younger than 2 years
  • Adults 50 years and older
  • People with a history of severe allergic reaction to any component of the vaccine or to a previous dose of any influenza vaccine
  • People with asthma
  • Children or adolescents on long-term aspirin treatment.
  • Children and adults who have chronic pulmonary, cardiovascular (except isolated hypertension), renal, hepatic, neurologic/neuromuscular, hematologic, or metabolic disorders
  • Children and adults who have immunosuppression (including immunosuppression caused by medications or by HIV)
  • Pregnant women

Moderate or severe acute illness with or without fever is a general precaution for vaccination. GBS within 6 weeks following a previous dose of influenza vaccine is considered a precaution for use of influenza vaccines.

 

 

While we’ve not seen any reported human cases of H7N9 coming out of China in more than two months, influenza viruses have historically posed the greatest pandemic threat, and so no one is willing to ignore the possibility that this virus could re-emerge later this winter or in the spring (see FAO Warns On Bird Flu).

 

Which explains the ongoing multi-national pursuit of an effective H7N9 vaccine (see Taiwan Adjusts Their H7N9 Vaccine Production Outlook).

Monday, December 31, 2012

Study: Self-Administered Vaccines In Adults

image

LAIV nasal syringe – Credit CDC PHIL 

 

# 6811

 

Beyond the difficulties of producing billions of doses of an emergency pandemic influenza vaccine, one of the logistical nightmares is how to best deploy them. The standard solutions – where vaccination centers are set up in public venues, pharmacies, and clinics – have some serious downsides.

 

Queuing hundreds of people together for hours during a pandemic is a good way to spread a virus further. And there are likely to be crowd control and security issues in some places as well.

 

During the 1976 Swine flu scare (see Deja Flu, All Over Again), I was one of thousands of health care workers around the country who were dragooned into providing pandemic flu shots. The logistics of vaccinating millions of people – even without a pandemic raging – were daunting.

image

Yes, that’s me in 1976. I and swear to this very day, that lady was making that face before I gave her the shot.

 

One solution –  made possible by the development of an  LAIV (Live attenuated Influenza Vaccine) – would be to have people self inoculate themselves at home. 

 

LAIV vaccines – unlike the standard flu shot - are delivered via a nasal spray, not a needle.

 

The CDC describes the major differences between the TIV (Trivalent Influenza Vaccine) shot, and the LAIV nasal spray as follows:

 

Major Differences Between TIV and LAIV

Influenza Prevention and Control Recommendations

Published for the 2010-11 Influenza Season; Adapted for the 2012-13 Influenza Season

Trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV) contains inactivated viruses and thus cannot cause influenza. Live-attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) contains live attenuated influenza viruses that have the potential to cause mild signs or symptoms related to vaccine virus infection (e.g., rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, fever, or sore throat). LAIV is administered intranasally by sprayer, whereas TIV is administered intramuscularly or intradermally by injection.

LAIV is licensed for use among nonpregnant persons aged 2-49 years; safety has not been established in persons with underlying medical conditions that confer a higher risk for influenza complications. TIV is licensed for use among persons 6 months and older, including those who are healthy and those with chronic medical conditions.

 

While not suitable for everyone, LAIVs could be used to inoculate a large segment of the population during an influenza pandemic, without the need of a Health care worker. 

 

All of which brings us to a study, recently published in the journal Vaccine (abstract slightly reparagraphed for readability), which looks at:

 

 

The safety and effectiveness of self-administration of intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine in adults.

 

Ambrose CS, Wu X.

 

Vaccine. 2012 Dec 19. pii: S0264-410X(12)01798-7. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2012.12.028.

Source

MedImmune, LLC, Gaithersburg, MD, USA. Electronic address: ambrosec@medimmune.com.

Abstract

Intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) has potential for self-administration (SA) by adults and adolescents, which could save time and cost in mass vaccination settings. Participants in a study of LAIV in adults (n=4561) selected either SA or health care provider (HCP) administration and were followed for febrile illness during the influenza season.

More LAIV recipients chose SA-LAIV (72%) than HCP-LAIV (28%). Overall, 97% of SA-LAIV and 98% of HCP-LAIV recipients had no problems with vaccine administration. Four of 13 study sites enrolled more than 50 subjects in both cohorts. Overall and for these 4 sites, illness incidence was similar with SA-LAIV and HCP-LAIV.

Solicited reactogenicity events and adverse events through 7 days post vaccination were comparable for SA-LAIV and HCP-LAIV recipients; both groups exhibited increased runny nose, sore throat, and cough relative to placebo recipients. SA-LAIV and HCP-LAIV appeared similarly effective against influenza-like illness and had comparable safety profiles.

 

CIDRAP NEWS  summarized these findings last week in their Flu News Scan.

 

Study: Smooth sailing for self-administered LAIV flu vax


Self-administered intranasal live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) is as safe and effective as that administered by health providers, according to recent analysis of data from a randomized, placebo-controlled study conducted in 1997 and 1998.

The study, which explored differences in administration and was funded by MedImmune, the maker of Flumist, appeared in the Dec 20 online edition of Vaccine. Self-administered flu vaccines could be useful in a pandemic mass immunization setting and could be a tool for making vaccination more efficient and less costly, the authors say.

<SNIP>

The research group found no significant difference in illness incidence between the two groups and observed comparable levels of reactions and adverse events 7 days after vaccination.
Dec 20 Vaccine
abstract

 

LAIVs are normally shipped  and stored at 35°F--46°F  (cite) - which makes mailing them problematic - but they could be easily distributed via drive thru windows or hand delivered to homes in neighborhoods.

 

LAIVs are particularly attractive during a pandemic because they can be produced in much larger quantities than Inactivated vaccines.

 

But there remain some questions regarding their effectiveness in adults, compared to the TIV (see Study: Nasal Flu Vaccines Generally Less Effective Than Shots In Adults).

 

Caveat: this study was based on seasonal flu vaccine strains used in the middle of the last decade, not on a newly emergent pandemic strain, and so the results may not be fully applicable.

 

Nevertheless, self-administered LAIVs have the potential to streamline vaccine delivery to a significant portion of the population during the next influenza pandemic. And with a novel flu, the quicker you can increase the levels of community immunity, the sooner the crisis will begin to abate.