Clinical Trial, Phase IV
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Disparate kinetics in immune response of two different Haemophilus influenzae type b conjugate vaccines: Immunogenicity and safety observations from a randomized controlled phase IV study in healthy infants and toddlers using a 2+1 schedule.

Since the introduction of Haemophilus Influenzae type b (Hib) conjugate vaccines, invasive Hib disease has strongly declined worldwide, yet continued control of Hib disease remains important. In Europe, currently three different hexavalent combination vaccines containing Hib conjugates are marketed. In this phase IV, single-blind, randomized, controlled, multi-country study (NCT04535037), we aimed to compare, in a 2 + 1 vaccination schedule, the immunogenicity and safety and show non-inferiority, as well as superiority, of DTPa-HBV-IPV/Hib (Ih group) versus DTaP5-HB-IPV-Hib (Va group) in terms of anti-polyribosylribitol phosphate (PRP) antibody geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) and proportion of participants reaching anti-PRP antibody concentrations greater than or equal to a threshold of 5 µg/mL. One month after the booster vaccination, the anti-PRP antibody GMC ratio (Ih group/Va group) was 0.917 (95% CI: 0.710-1.185), meeting the non-inferiority criteria. The difference in percentage of participants (Ih group - Va group) reaching GMCs ≥5 µg/mL was -6.3% (95% CI: -14.1% to 1.5%), not reaching the predefined non-inferiority threshold. Interestingly, a slightly higher post-booster antibody avidity was observed in the Ih group versus the Va group. Both vaccines were well tolerated, and no safety concerns were raised. This study illustrates the different kinetics of the anti-PRP antibody response post-primary and post-booster using the two vaccines containing different Hib conjugates and indicates a potential differential impact of concomitant vaccinations on the anti-PRP responses. The clinical implications of these differences should be further studied.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app