Immunogenicity and safety of the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine co-administered with the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine in adults ≥50 years of age: A randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated immunogenicity and safety of the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) when the first dose was co-administered with the 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) in adults aged ≥50 years. METHODS: In this open label, multi-center study (NCT02045836), participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either the first dose of RZV and PPSV23, co-administered at Day 0 and the second dose of RZV at Month 2 (Co-Ad group), or PPSV23 at Day 0, the first dose of RZV at Month 2 and second dose of RZV at Month 4 (Control group). Co-primary objectives were the RZV vaccine response rate (VRR) in the Co-Ad group and the non-inferiority of the antibody responses to RZV and PPSV23 in the Co-Ad group compared to the Control group. Reactogenicity and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: 865 participants were vaccinated (Co-Ad: 432, Control: 433). VRRs to RZV were >98% in both groups. Humoral immune responses to co-administration of RZV and PPSV23 were non-inferior to sequential administration. All three co-primary immunogenicity objectives were met. Solicited local symptoms after the first RZV dose were reported by similar percentages of participants in both groups. Solicited general symptoms were more frequently reported when the first dose of RZV and PPSV23 were co-administered. No differences were apparent between groups after the second RZV dose. CONCLUSIONS: No immunologic interference was observed between RZV and PPSV23 when co-administered in adults ≥50 years. No safety concerns were raised.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".