Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes a high disease burden in older adults. An effective vaccine for this RSV-primed population may need to boost/elicit robust RSV-neutralizing antibody responses and recall/induce RSV-specific T cell responses. To inform the selection of the vaccine formulation for older adults, RSVPreF3 (RSV fusion glycoprotein engineered to maintain the prefusion conformation) with/without AS01 adjuvant was evaluated in mice and bovine RSV infection-primed cattle. In mice, RSVPreF3/AS01 elicited robust RSV-A/B-specific neutralization titers and RSV F-specific polyfunctional CD4 T cell responses exceeding those induced by non-adjuvanted RSVPreF3. In primed bovines, RSVPreF3/AS01 tended to induce higher pre-/post-vaccination fold-increases in RSV-A/B-specific neutralization titers relative to non-adjuvanted and Alum-adjuvanted RSVPreF3 formulations, and elicited higher RSV F-specific CD4 T cell frequencies relative to the non-adjuvanted vaccine. Though AS01 adjuvanticity varied by animal species and priming status, RSVPreF3/AS01 elicited/boosted RSV-A/B-specific neutralization titers and RSV F-specific CD4 T cell responses in both animal models, which supported its further clinical evaluation as prophylactic candidate vaccine for older adults.

BACKGROUND:Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) presents a global health concern. A lipid nanoparticle-encapsulated mRNA-based RSV vaccine (mRNA-1345) that encodes the membrane-anchored RSV prefusion-stabilized F glycoprotein is under clinical investigation. METHODS:This phase 1 dose escalation study was based on a randomized, observer-blind, placebo-controlled design, and it assessed the safety and immunogenicity of mRNA-1345 in healthy adults aged 18 to 49 years. Participants were randomized to receive 1 dose of mRNA-1345 (50, 100, or 200 µg) or placebo or 3 doses of mRNA-1345 (100 µg) or placebo 56 days apart. RESULTS:mRNA-1345 was well tolerated at all dose levels. The most common solicited adverse reactions were pain, headache, fatigue, myalgia, or chills, which were all generally mild to moderate. At 1 month postinjection, a single injection of mRNA-1345 boosted RSV neutralizing antibody titers (geometric mean fold rise: RSV-A, 20.0-23.5; RSV-B, 11.7-16.0) and RSV prefusion binding antibody concentrations (geometric mean fold rise, 16.1-21.8), with no apparent dose response. Antibody levels remained above baseline through 6 months. Sequential doses of 100 µg were well tolerated but did not further boost antibody levels. CONCLUSIONS:A single mRNA-1345 injection demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in younger adults and induced a durable neutralizing antibody response, supporting its continued development. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04528719.

BACKGROUND:The adjuvanted RSV prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVPreF3 OA) was efficacious against RSV-related lower respiratory tract disease (RSV-LRTD) in ≥60-years-olds over 1 RSV season. We evaluated efficacy and safety of 1 RSVPreF3 OA dose and of 2 RSVPreF3 OA doses given 1 year apart against RSV-LRTD over 2 RSV seasons post-dose 1. METHODS:In this phase 3, blinded trial, ≥60-year-olds were randomized (1:1) to receive RSVPreF3 OA or placebo pre-season 1. RSVPreF3 OA recipients were re-randomized (1:1) to receive a second RSVPreF3 OA dose (RSV_revaccination group) or placebo (RSV_1dose group) pre-season 2; participants who received placebo pre-season 1 received placebo pre-season 2 (placebo group). Efficacy of both vaccine regimens against RSV-LRTD was evaluated over 2 seasons combined (confirmatory secondary objective, success criterion: lower limits of 2-sided CIs around efficacy estimates >20%). RESULTS:The efficacy analysis comprised 24 967 participants (RSV_1dose: 6227; RSV_revaccination: 6242; placebo: 12 498). Median efficacy follow-up was 17.8 months. Efficacy over 2 seasons of 1 RSVPreF3 OA dose was 67.2% (97.5% CI: 48.2-80.0%) against RSV-LRTD and 78.8% (95% CI: 52.6-92.0%) against severe RSV-LRTD. Efficacy over 2 seasons of a first dose followed by revaccination was 67.1% (97.5% CI: 48.1-80.0%) against RSV-LRTD and 78.8% (95% CI: 52.5-92.0%) against severe RSV-LRTD. Reactogenicity/safety of the revaccination dose were similar to dose 1. CONCLUSIONS:One RSVPreF3 OA dose was efficacious against RSV-LRTD over 2 RSV seasons in ≥60-year-olds. Revaccination 1 year post-dose 1 was well tolerated but did not seem to provide additional efficacy benefit in the overall study population. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04886596.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of hospitalization among U.S. infants. Nirsevimab (Bevfortus, Sanofi and AstraZeneca) is recommended to prevent RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI) in infants. In August 2023, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved RSVpreF vaccine (Abrysvo, Pfizer Inc.) for pregnant persons as a single dose during 32-36 completed gestational weeks (i.e., 32 weeks and zero days' through 36 weeks and 6 days' gestation) to prevent RSV-associated lower respiratory tract disease in infants aged <6 months. Since October 2021, CDC's Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) RSV Vaccines Pediatric/Maternal Work Group has reviewed RSV epidemiology and evidence regarding safety, efficacy, and potential economic impact of pediatric and maternal RSV prevention products, including RSVpreF vaccine. On September 22, 2023, ACIP and CDC recommended RSVpreF vaccine using seasonal administration (i.e., during September through end of January in most of the continental United States) for pregnant persons as a one-time dose at 32-36 weeks' gestation for prevention of RSV-associated LRTI in infants aged <6 months. Either maternal RSVpreF vaccination during pregnancy or nirsevimab administration to the infant is recommended to prevent RSV-associated LRTI among infants, but both are not needed for most infants. All infants should be protected against RSV-associated LRTI through use of one of these products.

BACKGROUND:Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a common cause of lower respiratory tract infections in infants. This phase 1/2, observer-blind, randomized, controlled study assessed the safety and immunogenicity of an investigational chimpanzee-derived adenoviral vector RSV vaccine (ChAd155-RSV, expressing RSV F, N, and M2-1) in infants. METHODS:Healthy 6- to 7-month-olds were 1:1:1-randomized to receive 1 low ChAd155-RSV dose (1.5 × 1010 viral particles) followed by placebo (RSV_1D); 2 high ChAd155-RSV doses (5 × 1010 viral particles) (RSV_2D); or active comparator vaccines/placebo (comparator) on days 1 and 31. Follow-up lasted approximately 2 years. RESULTS:Two hundred one infants were vaccinated (RSV_1D: 65; RSV_2D: 71; comparator: 65); 159 were RSV-seronaive at baseline. Most solicited and unsolicited adverse events after ChAd155-RSV occurred at similar or lower rates than after active comparators. In infants who developed RSV infection, there was no evidence of vaccine-associated enhanced respiratory disease (VAERD). RSV-A neutralizing titers and RSV F-binding antibody concentrations were higher post-ChAd155-RSV than postcomparator at days 31, 61, and end of RSV season 1 (mean follow-up, 7 months). High-dose ChAd155-RSV induced stronger responses than low-dose, with further increases post-dose 2. CONCLUSIONS:ChAd155-RSV administered to 6- to 7-month-olds had a reactogenicity/safety profile like other childhood vaccines, showed no evidence of VAERD, and induced a humoral immune response. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03636906.

BACKGROUND:Ad26.RSV.preF is an adenovirus serotype 26 vector-based respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine encoding a prefusion conformation-stabilized RSV fusion protein (preF) that demonstrated robust humoral and cellular immunogenicity and showed promising efficacy in a human challenge study in younger adults. Addition of recombinant RSV preF protein might enhance RSV-specific humoral immune responses, especially in older populations. METHODS:This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2a study compared the safety and immunogenicity of Ad26.RSV.preF alone and varying doses of Ad26.RSV.preF-RSV preF protein combinations in adults aged ≥60 years. This report includes data from cohort 1 (initial safety, n = 64) and cohort 2 (regimen selection, n = 288). Primary immunogenicity and safety analyses were performed 28 days postvaccination (cohort 2) for regimen selection. RESULTS:All vaccine regimens were well tolerated, with similar reactogenicity profiles among them. Combination regimens induced greater humoral immune responses (virus-neutralizing and preF-specific binding antibodies) and similar cellular ones (RSV-F-specific T cells) as compared with Ad26.RSV.preF alone. Vaccine-induced immune responses remained above baseline up to 1.5 years postvaccination. CONCLUSIONS:All Ad26.RSV.preF-based regimens were well tolerated. A combination regimen comprising Ad26.RSV.preF, which elicits strong humoral and cellular responses, and RSV preF protein, which increases humoral responses, was selected for further development. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT03502707.

BACKGROUND:When a randomized controlled trial fails to demonstrate statistically significant efficacy against the primary endpoint, a potentially costly new trial would need to be conducted to receive licensure. Incorporating data from previous trials might allow for more efficient follow-up trials to demonstrate efficacy, speeding the availability of effective vaccines. METHODS:Based on the outcomes from a failed trial of a maternal vaccine against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV), we simulated data for a new Bayesian group-sequential trial. We analyzed the data either ignoring data from the previous trial (i.e., weakly informative prior distributions) or using prior distributions incorporating the historical data into the analysis. We evaluated scenarios where efficacy in the new trial was the same, greater than, or less than that in the original trial. For each scenario, we evaluated the statistical power and type I error rate for estimating the vaccine effect following interim analyses. RESULTS:When we used a stringent threshold to control the type I error rate, analyses incorporating historical data had a small advantage over trials that did not. If control of type I error is less important (e.g., in a postlicensure evaluation), the incorporation of historical data can provide a substantial boost in efficiency. CONCLUSIONS:Due to the need to control the type I error rate in trials used to license a vaccine, incorporating historical data provides little additional benefit in terms of stopping the trial early. However, these statistical approaches could be promising in evaluations that use real-world evidence following licensure.

BACKGROUND:Co-administration of vaccines against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza can be considered given their overlapping seasonality, and may increase vaccine uptake and compliance. In this phase 3, open-label, randomized study, we evaluated the immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and safety of the AS01E-adjuvanted RSV prefusion F protein-based candidate vaccine (RSVPreF3 OA) when co-administered with a seasonal quadrivalent influenza vaccine (FLU-QIV) in older adults. METHODS:Participants aged ≥60 years (randomized 1:1) received either RSVPreF3 OA and FLU-QIV simultaneously on day 1 (Co-Ad group) or FLU-QIV on day 1 followed by RSVPreF3 OA on day 31 (sequential administration [SA] group). The co-primary objectives were to demonstrate noninferiority of RSVPreF3 OA in terms of RSV-A neutralization geometric mean titer (GMT) ratio and FLU-QIV in terms of hemagglutination inhibition GMT ratio for each FLU-QIV strain, when co-administered versus when administered alone at 1-month post-vaccination. Noninferiority was demonstrated if the upper limit of the 95% confidence interview of the group GMT ratio (SA/Co-Ad) was ≤1.5. Secondary descriptive objectives comprised additional immunogenicity assessments, reactogenicity, and safety. RESULTS:Of the 885 participants who received one dose of the study vaccines, 837 were included in the per protocol set. Demographic and baseline characteristics were balanced between the groups. Both co-primary objectives were met for both vaccines. Reported adverse events in both groups were mild-to-moderate, with a low frequency of grade 3 events. CONCLUSIONS:Data from this study demonstrate that RSVPreF3 OA can be co-administered with FLU-QIV. Co-administration is well tolerated, with an acceptable safety profile. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION:NCT04841577.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of severe respiratory illness and death among children worldwide, particularly in children younger than 6 months and in low-income and middle-income countries. Feasible and cost-effective interventions to prevent RSV disease are not yet widely available, although two new products aimed at preventing RSV disease-long-acting monoclonal antibodies and maternal vaccines-have been licensed within the past 2 years. The primary target of these products is reduction of the substantial burden of RSV-associated acute lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) in infants younger than 1 year. However, other important public health benefits might also accrue with the prevention of RSV-associated LRTI during the first year of life. Mounting evidence shows that preventing RSV-associated LRTI in infants younger than 1 year could prevent secondary pneumonia caused by other pathogens, reduce recurrent hospitalisations due to other respiratory diseases in later childhood, decrease all-cause infant mortality, ameliorate the burden of respiratory diseases on health-care systems, reduce inappropriate antibiotic use, and possibly improve lung health beyond infancy. We herein review current evidence and suggest approaches to better assess the magnitude of these potential secondary effects of RSV prevention, which, if proven substantial, are likely to be relevant to policy makers in many countries as they consider the use of these new products.

BACKGROUND:Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) and influenza are both typically seasonal diseases, with winter peaks in temperate climates. Coadministration of an RSV vaccine and influenza vaccine could be a benefit, requiring 1 rather than 2 visits to a healthcare provider for individuals receiving both vaccines. METHODS:The primary immunogenicity objective of this phase 3, 1:1 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in healthy adults aged ≥65 years in Australia was to demonstrate noninferiority of immune responses with coadministration of the stabilized RSV prefusion F protein-based vaccine (RSVpreF) and seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (SIIV) versus SIIV or RSVpreF administered alone, using a 1.5-fold noninferiority margin (lower bound 95% confidence interval >.667). Safety and tolerability were evaluated by collecting reactogenicity and adverse event data. RESULTS:Of 1403 participants randomized, 1399 received vaccinations (median age, 70; range, 65‒91 years). Local reactions and systemic events were mostly mild or moderate when RSVpreF was coadministered with SIIV or administered alone. No vaccine-related serious adverse events were reported. Geometric mean ratios were 0.86 for RSV-A and 0.85 for RSV-B neutralizing titers at 1 month after RSVpreF administration and 0.77 to 0.90 for strain-specific hemagglutination inhibition assay titers at 1 month after SIIV. All comparisons achieved the prespecified 1.5-fold noninferiority margin. CONCLUSIONS:The primary study objectives were met, demonstrating noninferiority of RSVpreF and SIIV immune responses when RSVpreF was coadministered with SIIV and that RSVpreF had an acceptable safety and tolerability profile when coadministered with SIIV. The results of this study support coadministration of RSVpreF and SIIV in an older-adult population. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION:https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT05301322.