4.5 Article

Safety and immunogenicity of 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV-15) compared to PCV-13 in healthy older adults

Journal

HUMAN VACCINES & IMMUNOTHERAPEUTICS
Volume 15, Issue 3, Pages 530-539

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2018.1532249

Keywords

pneumococcal conjugate vaccine; safety; immunogenicity

Funding

  1. Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Pneumococcal disease remains a public health priority in adults. Safety and immunogenicity of 2 different formulations of 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV15) containing 13 serotypes included in 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) plus 2 additional serotypes (22F and 33F) were evaluated in adults >= 50 years (V114-006; NCT02547649). Methods: A total of 690 subjects (230/arm) received a single dose of either PCV15 Formulation A, PCV15 Formulation B, or PCV13 and were followed for safety for 14 days postvaccination. Serotype-specific opsonophagocytic activity (OPA) geometric mean titers (GMTs) and Immunoglobulin G (IgG) geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) were measured immediately prior and 30 days postvaccination. Results: Both PCV15 formulations had generally comparable safety profiles to PCV13. Baseline IgG GMCs and OPA GMTs were comparable across vaccination groups. At 30 days postvaccination, both PCV15 formulations induced serotype specific antibodies to all 15 serotypes in the vaccine. IgG GMCs and OPA GMTs in recipients of either PCV15 formulation were non-inferior (<= 2-fold margin) to those measured in recipients of PCV13 for shared serotypes and superior (> 1.0-fold difference) for serotypes unique to PCV15. Formulation B generally induced higher immune responses than Formulation A. Conclusion: In healthy adults >= 50 years of age, both new formulations of PCV15 displayed acceptable safety profiles and induced serotype-specific immune responses comparable to PCV13.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available