Trial reportHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022
Immunological non-inferiority of a new fully liquid presentation of the MenACWY-CRM vaccine to the licensed vaccine: results from a randomized, controlled, observer-blind study in adolescents and young adults.
Trial report in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03433482 (Immunogenicity, Reactogenicity and Safety Study of Different Formulations of GSK Biologicals' Meningococcal ACWY Conjugate Vaccine), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 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.
Immunogenicity, Reactogenicity and Safety Study of Different Formulations of GSK Biologicals' Meningococcal ACWY Conjugate Vaccine (GSK3536820A and Menveo) When Administered to Healthy Adolescents and Young Adults 10 to 40 Years of Age
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development of a New Solid-Phase Extraction Base Method for Free Saccharide Content Estimation of Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccines.ACS omega · 2022Article
- Application of Causal Inference to Establish Assay Effect in the Absence of a Bridging Study: A Case Study of MenACWY-CRM Conjugate Vaccine Data.Pharmaceutical statisticsArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
26 authors at 15 institutions in 10 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A fully liquid MenACWY-CRM vaccine presentation has been developed, modifying the meningococcal serogroup A (MenA) component from lyophilized to liquid. The safety and immunogenicity of the liquid presentation at the end of the intended shelf-life (aged for 24 or 30 months) were compared to the licensed lyophilized/liquid presentation. This multicenter, randomized (1:1), observer-blind, phase 2b study (NCT03433482) enrolled adolescents and young adults (age 10-40 years). In part 1, 844 participants received one dose of liquid presentation stored for approximately 24 months or licensed presentation. In part 2, 846 participants received one dose of liquid presentation stored for approximately 30 months or licensed presentation. After storage, the MenA free saccharide (FS) level was approximately 25% and O-acetylation was approximately 45%. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of the liquid presentation to licensed presentation, as measured by human serum bactericidal assay (hSBA) geometric mean titers (GMTs) against MenA, 1-month post-vaccination. Immune responses against each vaccine serogroup were similar between groups. Between-group ratios of hSBA GMTs for MenA were 1.21 (part 1) and 1.11 (part 2), with two-sided 95% confidence interval lower limits (0.94 and 0.87, respectively) greater than the prespecified non-inferiority margin (0.5), thus meeting the primary study objective. No safety concerns were identified. Despite reduced O-acetylation of MenA and increased FS content, serogroup-specific immune responses induced by the fully liquid presentation were similar to those induced by the licensed MenACWY-CRM vaccine, with non-inferior anti-MenA responses. The safety profiles of the vaccine presentations were similar.
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.