MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2548989094 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofw172.1049

Preparedness for and Response to Meningococcal Outbreaks: Safety Results. of a Randomized Controlled Trial of Two Schedules of 4CMenB Vaccine in Adolescents and Young Adults

2016· article· en· W2548989094 on OpenAlexaff
Joanne M. Langley, Soren Gantt, Caroline Quach, Joenel Alcantara, Julie A. Bettinger, Scott A. Halperin, Brian J. Ward, Shelly McNeil, Jill Mutch, Donna MacKinnon‐Cameron, Kim Marty, David W. Scheifele

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of British ColumbiaNova Scotia Health AuthorityIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreBC Children's HospitalDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMeningococcal vaccineRandomized controlled trialPreparednessOutbreakMeningococcal diseasePediatricsInternal medicineNeisseria meningitidisVirologyImmunizationImmunology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Emergency vaccination programs are often needed when outbreaks of Meningococcal B (MenB) disease in young adults attending university occur. The four-component MenB vaccine (4CMenB, Bexsero, Novartis, GlaxoSmithKline) is authorized for persons 2 months through 17 years in Canada, but there is limited data on safety and immunogenicity in persons >17 years or on various dosing schedules. Methods. A randomized, controlled, observer-blinded trial comparing an accelerated 4CMenB schedule (0, 21 days) compared to a standard schedule (0, 60 days) was conducted during the academic year (September 2015–April 2016) in persons 17–25 years of age, in stable health and attending school, at three sites. The first dose in both groups was 4CMenB vaccine. Solicited local and systemic adverse events (AE) days 0–6 post vaccine and unsolicited events days 0–21 were collected on memory aides. Analysis of immune responses on Days 0, 21, 42, 81, and 180 is underway. Results. Among 121 participants the mean age was 21.4 years (range 17.0–26.0); 69.4% (n = 84) were female. Any solicited AE occurred in 100%, 73.7%, and 78.0% post doses 1, 2, and 3, respectively. One serious AE (fractured patella) occurred. The most common solicited AE Day 0–6 was local: pain at the injection site in 99.2%, 64.4%, and 71.2% after doses 1, 2, and 3, respectively, followed by systemic muscles aches in 52.9%, 33.1%, and 35.6%, respectively. Drowsiness Day 0–6 occurred in in 38%, 27.1%, and 29.7% and nausea in 18.2%, 17.8%, and 16.9% of participants after doses 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Fever was only reported in 2 participants (1.7%), after dose 2. Overall, a Grade 1 AE occurred in 33.9%, 32.2%, and 30.5%, any Grade 2 AE in 30.6%, 11.9%, and 13.6%, and a Grade 3 AE in 5.8%, 5.9%, and 6.8% of participants after doses 1, 2, and 3. Conclusion. A multicenter rapid clinical trial of a 4CMenB vaccine was conducted by the Clinical Trials Network of CIRN. Pain at the injection site and muscle aches were highest after the first (unblinded) dose. Systemic muscle aches, drowsiness, and nausea were common after all doses. Fever was not common and AEs did not interfere with study completion (120/121 participants received three doses). The safety profile in this age group and using this schedule are similar to that observed in younger adolescents. Disclosures. J. Langley, Pfizer, GSK: Investigator, Research grant B. J. Ward, Pfizer: Investigator, Grant recipient S. Mcneil, Sanofi Pasteur, GSK, Merck, Novartis: Investigator, Grant recipient

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicBacterial Infections and VaccinesFrench-language works237,207