Trial reportPloS one2015
DNA priming for seasonal influenza vaccine: a phase 1b double-blind randomized clinical trial.
Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01498718 (Double-Blind, Randomized Phase 1b Study of 2011/12 Influenza Investigational DNA Vaccine, VRC-FLUDNA061-00-VP, Followed by 2012/13 Trivalent Inactivated Vaccine), which is not on this map. Cited by 11 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Double-Blind, Randomized Phase 1b Study of 2011/12 Influenza Investigational DNA Vaccine, VRC-FLUDNA061-00-VP, Followed by 2012/13 Trivalent Inactivated Vaccine (TIV) Compared to 2012/13 TIV Alone in Healthy Adults
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Trial
- Trial
- Breaking resistance: strategies for novel antibacterial therapeutic interventions.Molecular biology reports · 2026Review
- DNA priming immunization is more effective than recombinant protein vaccine in eliciting antigen-specific B cell responses.Emerging microbes & infections · 2021Article
- Advances in gene-based vaccine platforms to address the COVID-19 pandemic.Advanced drug delivery reviews · 2021Review
- Platforms Exploited for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine Development.Vaccines · 2020Review
- New Technologies for Influenza Vaccines.Microorganisms · 2020Review
- Next-generation influenza vaccines: opportunities and challenges.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2020Review
- Immunogenicity and Protection Efficacy of a Naked Self-Replicating mRNA-Based Zika Virus Vaccine.Vaccines · 2019Article
- A Review of DNA Vaccines Against Influenza.Frontiers in immunology · 2018Review
- An avian influenza H7 DNA priming vaccine is safe and immunogenic in a randomized phase I clinical trial.NPJ vaccines · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe efficacy of current influenza vaccines is limited in vulnerable populations. DNA vaccines can be produced rapidly, and may offer a potential strategy to improve vaccine immunogenicity, indicated by studies with H5 influenza DNA vaccine prime followed by inactivated vaccine boost.
methodsFour sites enrolled healthy adults, randomized to receive 2011/12 seasonal influenza DNA vaccine prime (n=65) or phosphate buffered saline (PBS) (n=66) administered intramuscularly with Biojector. All subjects received the 2012/13 seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine, trivalent (IIV3) 36 weeks after the priming injection. Vaccine safety and tolerability was the primary objective and measurement of antibody response by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI) was the secondary objective.
resultsThe DNA vaccine prime-IIV3 boost regimen was safe and well tolerated. Significant differences in HAI responses between the DNA vaccine prime and the PBS prime groups were not detected in this study.
conclusionWhile DNA priming significantly improved the response to a conventional monovalent H5 vaccine in a previous study, it was not effective in adults using seasonal influenza strains, possibly due to pre-existing immunity to the prime, unmatched prime and boost antigens, or the lengthy 36 week boost interval. Careful optimization of the DNA prime-IIV3 boost regimen as related to antigen matching, interval between vaccinations, and pre-existing immune responses to influenza is likely to be needed in further evaluations of this vaccine strategy. In particular, testing this concept in younger age groups with less prior exposure to seasonal influenza strains may be informative.
trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT01498718.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.