Phase 3 trial to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of V114, a 15-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, followed by 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine 6 months later, in at-risk adults 18–49 years of age (PNEU-DAY): A subgroup analysis by baseline risk factors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Immunocompetent adults with certain medical and behavioral factors are at increased risk of pneumococcal disease. In some countries, sequential vaccination with 13-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) followed by 23-valent pneumococcal polysaccharide vaccine (PPSV23) is recommended for at-risk adults. This subgroup analysis from a phase 3 study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of sequential administration of either V114 (a 15-valent PCV containing serotypes 1, 3, 4, 5, 6A, 6B, 7F, 9V, 14, 18C, 19A, 19F, 22F, 23F, and 33F) or PCV13, followed 6 months later by PPSV23, in immunocompetent adults 18-49 years of age with pre-defined risk factors for pneumococcal disease. Safety and immunogenicity post-vaccination were analyzed by type and baseline number of risk factors for pneumococcal disease (1 and ≥2 risk factors). This analysis included 1,131 participants randomized 3:1 to receive either V114 or PCV13, followed by PPSV23. The majority (73.1%) of participants had at least one risk factor. Safety and tolerability profiles of V114 and PCV13 were similar across risk factor groups. V114 administered either alone or sequentially with PPSV23 6 months later was immunogenic for all 15 serotypes, including those not contained in PCV13, regardless of the number of baseline risk factors. V114 has the potential to broaden serotype coverage for at-risk adults.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".