Immunogenicity and safety of a cell culture-based quadrivalent influenza vaccine in adults: A Phase III, double-blind, multicenter, randomized, non-inferiority study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quadrivalent influenza vaccines (QIVs), which include both B lineage strains, are expected to provide broader protection than trivalent influenza vaccines (TIVs). The non-inferiority, immunogenicity, and safety of a cell culture-based investigational QIVc and 2 TIVs (TIV1c, TIV2c), in adults (≥18 y), were evaluated in this Phase III, double-blind, multicenter study. A total of 2680 age-stratified subjects were randomized (2:1:1) to receive 1 dose of QIVc (n = 1335), TIV1c (n = 676), or TIV2c (n = 669). TIV1c (B/Yamagata) and TIV2c (B/Victoria) differed only in B strain lineage. The primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority of the hemagglutinin-inhibition antibody responses of QIVc against TIVc, 22 d post-vaccination. Secondary objectives included the evaluation of immunogenicity of QIVc and TIVc in younger (≥18 - <65 y) and older (≥65 y) adults. Hemagglutinin inhibition assays were performed at days 1 and 22. Solicited local and systemic adverse events (AEs) were monitored for 7 d post-vaccination, and unsolicited AEs and serious AEs until day 181. QIVc met the non-inferiority criteria for all 4 vaccine strains and demonstrated superiority for both influenza B strains over the unmatched B strain included in the TIV1c and TIV2c, when geometric mean titers and seroconversion rates with TIVc were compared at day 22. Between 48%-52% of subjects experienced ≥1 solicited AE, the most common being injection-site pain and headache. Serious AEs were reported by ≤1% of subjects, none were vaccine-related. The results indicate that QIVc is immunogenic and well tolerated in both younger and older adults. The immunogenicity and safety profiles of QIVc and TIVc were comparable at all ages evaluated.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".