4.3 Article Proceedings Paper

Phase 2 study of an HIV-1 canarypox vaccine (vCP1452) alone and in combination with rgp120 - Negative results fail to trigger a phase 3 correlates trial

期刊

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.qai.0000248356.48501.ff

关键词

canarypox vector; cytotoxic T lymphocyte; enzyme-linked immunospot assay; HIV vaccine; rgp120 subunit protein; vCP1452

资金

  1. Intramural NIH HHS [Z99 AI999999] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIAID NIH HHS [U01 AI046747, UM1 AI069496, U01 AI069496, UO1 AI 46747] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: A goal of T-cell HIV vaccines is to define the correlation between a vaccine-induced immune response and protection from HIV infection. We conducted a phase 2 trial to determine if a canarypox vaccine candidate (vCP1452) administered with rgp120 subunit protein would qualify for a trial to define a correlate of efficacy. Methods: A total of 330 healthy volunteers were enrolled into 4 groups: 120 received vCP1452 alone (0, 1, 3, and 6 months), 120 received vCP1452 with 2 different regimens of rgp120 coadministration, and 90 received placebo. HIV-specific antibody responses were measured by enzyme-linked immunoassay (ELISA) and neutralizing activity. T-cell responses were measured by chromium release and interferon-gamma (IFN-gamma) enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISpot) assays Results: Significant neutralizing antibody responses to the HIV MN strain were detected in all vaccine groups, with net responses ranging from 57% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 40% to 71%) to 94% (95% CI: 85% to 99%). Net cumulative HIV-specific CD8(+) IFN-gamma ELISpot assay responses were 13% (95% CI: -1% to 26%) for recipients of vCP1452 alone and 16% (95% CI: 2% to 29%) for recipients of vCP1452 plus rgp120. Conclusions: Overall, the HIV-specific CD8(+) cytotoxic T lymphocyte (CTL) response was not sufficient to qualify the regimen for a subsequent trial designed to detect an immune correlate of protection requiring a minimum CD8(+) CTL frequency of 30%.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据