• FluTrackers.com Inc. does not provide medical advice. Information on this web site is collected from various internet resources, and the FluTrackers board of directors makes no warranty to the safety, efficacy, correctness or completeness of the information posted on this site by any author or poster. The information collated here is for instructional and/or discussion purposes only and is NOT intended to diagnose or treat any disease, illness, or other medical condition. Every individual reader or poster should seek advice from their personal physician/healthcare practitioner before considering or using any interventions that are discussed on this website. By continuing to access this website you agree to consult your personal physican before using any interventions posted on this website, and you agree to hold harmless FluTrackers.com Inc., the board of directors, the members, and all authors and posters for any effects from use of any medication, supplement, vitamin or other substance, device, intervention, etc. mentioned in posts on this website, or other internet venues referenced in posts on this website.
  • We are not asking for any donations. Do not donate to any entity who says they are raising funds for us.

Safety and immunogenicity of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in adults 60 years of age and older: a phase II, a randomized, comparative trial

tetano

Editor, Senior Moderator
Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2020 Feb 12:1-7. doi: 10.1080/21645515.2019.1705691. [Epub ahead of print] [h=1]Safety and immunogenicity of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in adults 60 years of age and older: a phase II, a randomized, comparative trial in Kazakhstan.[/h]
Sarsenbayeva G[SUP]1[/SUP], Issagulov T[SUP]1[/SUP], Kassenov M[SUP]1[/SUP], Abitay R[SUP]1[/SUP], Orynbayev M[SUP]1[/SUP], Stukova M[SUP]2[/SUP], Pisareva M[SUP]2[/SUP], Davlyatshin T[SUP]3[/SUP], Lespek K[SUP]1[/SUP], Khairullin B[SUP]1[/SUP].
[h=3]Author information[/h]

[h=3]Abstract[/h] Background: The study was aimed at comparative evaluation of seasonal influenza vaccine RIBSP versus commercial vaccine VAXIGRIP? for immunogenicity and safety in the course of clinical trial phase II on healthy subjects up to 60 years.Methods: The trial involved 150 subjects in randomized 2:1 groups that received either RIBSP vaccine or comparator vaccine VAXIGRIP?. One dose (0.5 ml) of either vaccine contained 15 ?g of hemagglutinin of each influenza virus strain recommended by WHO for the Northern hemisphere in 2016-2017 flu season. The observation period lasted 21 days. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03016143.Results: Assessment of immunogenic activity of the vaccine under study showed that in 21 days the portion of participants with 4-fold seroconversions was 80.0% to А/H1N1; 65.0% to А/H3N2 and 64.0% to B virus. Antibody titer increase factor in the group of subjects that received RIBSP vaccine was 13.4 for А/H1N1; 5.2 for А/H3N2 and 5.2 for B virus. The subjects that received RIBSP vaccine demonstrated 88% seroprotection rate against А/H1N1; 75% against А/H3N2 and 61% against B virus. In the course of evaluating the vaccine safety, no serious adverse events were recorded. All changes of laboratory data were slight and single in most cases. All recorded local reactions have been light in character and these have been predicted reactions observed at vaccination against influenza.Conclusion: Comparison vaccines RIBSP and VAXIGRIP?, showed similar immunogenic activity. The RIBSP vaccine is safe and immunogenic for the elderly and conforms to international criteria in CPMP/BWP/214/96.


[h=4]KEYWORDS:[/h] Humoral immunity; Influenza virus; Vaccines/vaccines strains

PMID: 32048890 DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2019.1705691
 
Back
Top Bottom