A Randomized Trial Assessing the Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity of Two Hexavalent Infant Vaccines Concomitantly Administered With Group B Meningococcal Vaccine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Three hexavalent (DTaP-IPV-Hib-HepB) vaccines are licensed in Europe, only one of which (Vaxelis, Hex-V), uses a meningococcal outer membrane protein complex as a carrier protein for Hemophilus influenza type b (Hib), creating potential interactions with the meningococcal vaccine 4CMenB. METHODS: In this single-center open-label randomized trial, infants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive Hex-V or an alternative hexavalent vaccine (Infanrix-Hexa, Hex-IH) at 2, 3, and 4 months with 4CMenB (2, 4, and 12 months) in the UK routine immunization schedule. The primary outcome was noninferiority of geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) of anti-PRP (Hib) IgG at 5 months of age. Secondary outcomes included safety, reactogenicity, and immunogenicity of other administered vaccines measured at 5 and 13 months of age. RESULTS: Of the 194 participants enrolled, 96 received Hex-V and 98 Hex-IH. Noninferiority of anti-PRP IgG GMCs at 5 months of age in participants receiving Hex-V was established; GMCs were 23-times higher following three doses of Hex-V than three doses of Hex-IH (geometric mean ratio (GMR) 23.25; one-sided 95% CI 16.21, -). 78/85 (92%) of Hex-V recipients and 43/87 (49%) of Hex-IH recipients had anti-PRP antibodies ≥1.0 µg/mL. At 5 months of age serum, bactericidal activity titers against MenB strain 5/99 were higher following Hex-V than Hex-IH (GMR 1.56; 95% CI, 1.13-2.14). The reactogenicity profile was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: These data support flexibility in the use of either Hex-IH or Hex-V in infant immunization schedules containing 4CMenB, with the possibility that Hex-V may enhance protection against Hib.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".