MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558206896 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofw172.589

Safety of MenB-FHbp (Bivalent rLP2086), a Meningococcal Serogroup B Vaccine, in Young Adults: Results From a Phase 3 Trial

2016· article· en· W2558206896 on OpenAlexaff
Lars Østergaard, Brian J. Ward, Johannes Beeslaar, Joseph Eiden, Kathrin U. Jansen, Judith Absalon, Laura J. York, David Radley, Jean-Louis Prégaldien, Nina Breinholt Stærke, John L. Perez

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicBacterial Infections and Vaccines
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBivalent (engine)MedicineMeningococcal vaccineNeisseria meningitidisVirologyImmunologyAntigenBiologyGeneticsBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. MenB-FHbp (bivalent rLP2086) was the first vaccine licensed in the US through an accelerated approval process to prevent invasive meningococcal serogroup B (MnB) disease in individuals aged 10–25 years. Confirmatory immunogenicity and safety studies have been completed, with a large proportion of subjects having been enrolled in the United States. We present data from the safety evaluations of US subjects enrolled in one of 3 large phase 3 studies. Methods. Healthy subjects aged 18 to <26 years were randomized to MenB-FHbp or saline at 0, 2, and 6 months. Safety variables, including local, systemic reactions and antipyretic use within 7 days after vaccination, and unsolicited adverse events (AEs), including immediate AEs, medically attended AEs (MAEs), SAEs, and newly diagnosed chronic medical conditions (NDCMCs), were assessed. Results. A total of 2471 and 822 subjects received MenB-FHbp or saline, respectively; 1644 were from the US (MenB-FHbp, n = 1232; saline, n = 412). Local and systemic reactions were more common with MenB-FHbp, mostly mild or moderate in severity, and more frequent after the first vaccination. Injection-site pain (83.7%) and fatigue (59.0%) were the most common local and systemic reactions with MenB-FHbp, respectively (figure). 4.1% and 1.0% of MenB-FHbp and control recipients reported fever ≥38°C (figure) and 17.6% and 7.8%, respectively, used antipyretics. One MenB-FHbp recipient reported fever >40.0°C which lasted 1 day. Worsening of severity of local and systemic events with subsequent vaccinations was not observed. Few SAEs were reported overall among US subjects. Similar rates of AEs, SAEs MAEs, and NDCMC were reported between groups; table). Conclusion. MenB-FHbp was safe and tolerable among US adolescents. Results were consistent with the safety profile observed in the global study. Disclosures. J. F. Beeslaar, Pfizer Ltd: Employee and Shareholder, Salary and Stock, Stock options, and long-term projections; J. J. Eiden, Pfizer, Inc: Employee, Salary; K. U. Jansen, Pfizer, Inc: Employee and Shareholder, Salary; J. Absalon, Pfizer, Inc: Employee, Salary; L. J. York, Pfizer, Inc: Employee, Salary; D. Radley, Pfizer, Inc: Employee and Shareholder, Salary J. L. Prégaldien, Pfizer Ltd: Employee, Salary; N. Breinholt Staerke, Pfizer, Inc: Investigator, Study Sponsored by Pfizer; J. L. Perez, Pfizer, Inc: Employee, Salary

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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