MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2899034031 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofy209.019

149. Immunogenicity, Safety, and Post-hoc Efficacy Assessment of the Adjuvanted Recombinant Zoster Vaccine in Adults with Hematologic Malignancies: A Phase 3, Randomized Clinical Trial

2018· article· en· W2899034031 on OpenAlexaff
Alemnew F. Dagnew, Osman İlhan, Won-Sik Lee, Dariusz Woszczyk, Jae‐Yong Kwak, Stella Bowcock, Sang Kyun Sohn, Gabriela Rodríguez Macias, Tzeon‐Jye Chiou, Dimas Quiel, Mickaël Aoun, María Belén Navarro Matilla, Javier de la Serna, Samuel T. Milliken, John Murphy, Shelly McNeil, Bruno Salaun, Emmanuel Di Paolo, Laura Cámpora, Marta López‐Fauqued, Mohamed El Idrissi, Anne Schuind, Thomas C. Heineman, Peter van Steen, Lidia Oostvogels

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Health AuthorityIzaak Walton Killam Health CentreDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAdverse effectImmunogenicityClinical trialInternal medicineVaccinationImmunologyPlaceboImmune systemCancerOncologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with hematologic malignancies treated with anticancer immunosuppressive therapies (ITs) are at increased risk of herpes zoster (HZ). In a previous report of this phase 3, observer-blind, multicenter trial (NCT01767467), the adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) was shown to be immunogenic and well-tolerated in ≥18 years of age patients with hematologic malignancies who completed or were undergoing anticancer IT.1 Here we report end-of-study results from the same trial. Methods Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive 2 doses of RZV or placebo (PL) 1–2 months apart, either ≥10 days before or after a cancer therapy cycle, or 10 days to 6 months after cancer therapy ended. Humoral and cell-mediated immune (CMI) responses were evaluated at 1 month and 12 months post-dose 2 (month 2 and month 13, respectively). Confirmatory objectives were to evaluate humoral response rate to RZV and to compare humoral immune responses to RZV and PL at month 2 excluding either subjects with chronic lymphocytic leukemia and non-Hodgkin B-cell lymphoma (NHBCL), or only those with NHBCL. Efficacy against HZ was explored in a post-hoc analysis of confirmed HZ cases. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events (AEs) were recorded for 7 and 30 days after each dose, respectively. Serious AEs (SAEs) and potential immune-mediated diseases (pIMDs) were recorded throughout the study. Results Of the 562 (RZV: 283, PL: 279) treated participants, 415 (RZV: 217, PL: 198)/310 (RZV: 168, PL: 142) were included in the according-to-protocol (ATP) cohort for humoral immunogenicity/immune persistence. The ATP sub-cohort for CMI included 132 (RZV: 69, PL: 63) participants at month 2 and 100 (RZV: 54, PL: 46) at month 13. All confirmatory immunogenicity objectives were met (Table 1). RZV efficacy against HZ, assessed post-hoc, was 87.2% (Table 2). RZV was more reactogenic than PL. The occurrence of unsolicited AEs, SAEs, and pIMDs was similar between the study groups (Table 3). Conclusion RZV induced robust humoral and cellular immune responses and showed an effect in the reduction of HZ incidence in patients with hematologic malignancies who completed or were undergoing anticancer IT. No safety concerns were identified. Reference 1. Oostvogels et al. IDWeek2017, abs 1344. Funding. GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA. Disclosures A. F. Dagnew, GSK: Employee and Shareholder, Salary. J. Murphy, GSK: Investigator, Research support. S. A. McNeil, GSK group of companies: Grant Investigator, Research grant and Research support. B. Salaun, GSK group of companies: Employee and Shareholder, Salary. E. Di Paolo, GSK group of companies: Employee, Salary. L. Campora, GSK group of companies: Employee and Shareholder, Salary. M. López-Fauqued, GSK group of companies: Employee, Salary. M. El Idrissi, GSK group of companies: Employee, Salary. A. Schuind, GSK: Employee, Salary. T. C. Heineman, GSK group of companies: Consultant, Employee and Shareholder, Consulting fee and Salary. P. Van Den Steen, GSK: Employee and Shareholder, Restricted shares and Salary. L. Oostvogels, GSK: Employee, Salary and Stock and stock options.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.109
Threshold uncertainty score0.654

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207