Safety and immunogenicity of a vaccine against coxsackieviruses B (PRV-101) - follow-up of the first-in-human phase 1 trial
Laiho, J. E.; Lehtonen, J. P.; Puustinen, L.; Kaariainen, S.; Harkonen, T.; Oikarinen, S.; Leon, F.; Scheinin, M.; Knip, M.; Sanjuan, M.; Hyoty, H.
Show abstract
BackgroundCoxsackie B viruses cause acute infections and have been linked to chronic diseases like cardiomyopathies, type 1 diabetes, and celiac disease. Despite their clinical significance, no vaccines exist for coxsackie B virus types. PRV-101, a new candidate vaccine covering five coxsackie B virus types, showed good immunogenicity and tolerability in a phase 1 trial (PROVENT). MethodsWe conducted an extended follow-up of the PROVENT trial to assess the long-term immune response and safety of PRV-101. A total of 26 participants from the original cohort (n=32) were enrolled for additional testing approximately two years post-immunization (11 high-dose, 10 low-dose, and 5 placebo). Coxsackie B virus -specific antibody responses were measured and compared to earlier time points. ResultsPRV-101 was safe with no late adverse effects or emergence of autoantibodies linked to type 1 diabetes or celiac disease. Neutralizing virus antibodies remained elevated, with a clear dose-dependent response. In the high-dose group, antibodies against all coxsackie B virus types reached presumably protective levels, except for coxsackie B virus 2, where two participants turned seronegative. ELISA tests confirmed elevated antibody levels against coxsackie B virus proteins. DiscussionThese results suggest that PRV-101 induces durable antibody responses lasting at least two years. The findings support the continued development of PRV-101 for preventing both acute coxsackie B virus infections and chronic diseases like type 1 diabetes and celiac disease.
Matching journals
The top 10 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Kinetics and persistence of the cellular and humoral immune responses to BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine in SARS-CoV-2-naive and - experienced subjects 95%
- Study on the mucosal and serological immune response to the Novel Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines 95%
- Serial infection with SARS-CoV-2 Omicron BA.1 and BA.2 following three-dose COVID-19 vaccination 94%
Similar papers in this journal
- Safety and Immunogenicity of An Egg-Based Inactivated Newcastle Disease Virus Vaccine Expressing SARS-CoV-2 Spike: Interim Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase 1/2 Trial in Vietnam 95%
- Immunogenicity and Safety of Booster Dose of S-268019-b or Tozinameran in Japanese Participants: An Interim Report of Phase 2/3, Randomized, Observer-Blinded, Noninferiority Study 95%
- Safety and Immunogenicity of an Inactivated Recombinant Newcastle Disease Virus Vaccine Expressing SARS-CoV-2 Spike: A Randomised, Comparator-Controlled, Phase 2 Trial 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- The effect of anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody, bamlanivimab, on endogenous immune response to COVID-19 vaccination 95%
- SARS-CoV-2 Omicron neutralization by therapeutic antibodies, convalescent sera, and post-mRNA vaccine booster 94%
- Immune Responses in Fully Vaccinated Individuals Following Breakthrough Infection with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta Variant in Provincetown, Massachusetts 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Immunogenicity of a third dose of BNT162b2 to ancestral SARS-CoV-2 & Omicron variant in adults who received two doses of inactivated vaccine 95%
- Humoral and cellular immune responses against SARS-CoV-2 variants and human coronaviruses after single BNT162b2 vaccination 93%
- Interim report: Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 in healthy chilean adults in a phase 3 clinical trial 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.