Vaccine Development: From Preclinical Studies to Phase 1/2 Clinical Trials

Author(s):  
Cécile Artaud ◽  
Leila Kara ◽  
Odile Launay
2010 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 214-219
Author(s):  
Robyn J. Barst

Drug development is the entire process of introducing a new drug to the market. It involves drug discovery, screening, preclinical testing, an Investigational New Drug (IND) application in the US or a Clinical Trial Application (CTA) in the EU, phase 1–3 clinical trials, a New Drug Application (NDA), Food and Drug Administration (FDA) review and approval, and postapproval studies required for continuing safety evaluation. Preclinical testing assesses safety and biologic activity, phase 1 determines safety and dosage, phase 2 evaluates efficacy and side effects, and phase 3 confirms efficacy and monitors adverse effects in a larger number of patients. Postapproval studies provide additional postmarketing data. On average, it takes 15 years from preclinical studies to regulatory approval by the FDA: about 3.5–6.5 years for preclinical, 1–1.5 years for phase 1, 2 years for phase 2, 3–3.5 years for phase 3, and 1.5–2.5 years for filing the NDA and completing the FDA review process. Of approximately 5000 compounds evaluated in preclinical studies, about 5 compounds enter clinical trials, and 1 compound is approved (Tufts Center for the Study of Drug Development, 2011). Most drug development programs include approximately 35–40 phase 1 studies, 15 phase 2 studies, and 3–5 pivotal trials with more than 5000 patients enrolled. Thus, to produce safe and effective drugs in a regulated environment is a highly complex process. Against this backdrop, what is the best way to develop drugs for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH), an orphan disease often rapidly fatal within several years of diagnosis and in which spontaneous regression does not occur?


Author(s):  
SUTAPA BISWAS MAJEE ◽  
SOUPAYAN PAL

Meningitis, a serious communicable inflammatory disease continues to be a worldwide threat especially in sub-Saharan Africa affecting millions of people with high death rates every year. Strains from six serogroups of the principal causative organism Neisseria meningitidis are found to be responsible for the majority of infections. Incidences of antibiotic resistance and efforts to provide mass protection have necessitated the development of meningococcal vaccines since the latter half of the 20th century. Aiming to ostracize meningitis by 2030, the World Health Organization focuses on vaccination as an important strategy to reach the goal. Due to limited efficacy and stability issues of earlier polysaccharide and protein conjugate vaccines respectively, outer membrane vesicle (OMV) vaccines were developed. Gene manipulations have also led to the development of more efficacious tailor-made OMV vaccines due to over-expression of antigenic outer membrane proteins along with lesser pyrogenicity. Available data from preclinical studies in animal models and clinical trials, on meningococcal vaccine candidates report the strength of immune response measured by serological tests such as enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and serum bactericidal assay. Post-immunization adverse reactions have been also monitored as a part of safety assessment. The novelty of the present review lies in summarizing the outcomes of the preclinical animal studies and clinical trials conducted on various types of meningococcal vaccines till date and thereby highlighting the paucities in the existing information which can facilitate understanding the present scenario, challenges, and future scope in the field of meningococcal vaccine development.


Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 747
Author(s):  
Ralf Wagner ◽  
Eberhard Hildt ◽  
Elena Grabski ◽  
Yuansheng Sun ◽  
Heidi Meyer ◽  
...  

Multiple preventive COVID-19 vaccines have been developed during the ongoing SARS coronavirus (CoV) 2 pandemic, utilizing a variety of technology platforms, which have different properties, advantages, and disadvantages. The acceleration in vaccine development required to combat the current pandemic is not at the expense of the necessary regulatory requirements, including robust and comprehensive data collection along with clinical product safety and efficacy evaluation. Due to the previous development of vaccine candidates against the related highly pathogenic coronaviruses SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV, the antigen that elicits immune protection is known: the surface spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 or specific domains encoded in that protein, e.g., the receptor binding domain. From a scientific point of view and in accordance with legal frameworks and regulatory practices, for the approval of a clinic trial, the Paul-Ehrlich-Institut requires preclinical testing of vaccine candidates, including general pharmacology and toxicology as well as immunogenicity. For COVID-19 vaccine candidates, based on existing platform technologies with a sufficiently broad data base, pharmacological–toxicological testing in the case of repeated administration, quantifying systemic distribution, and proof of vaccination protection in animal models can be carried out in parallel to phase 1 or 1/2 clinical trials. To reduce the theoretical risk of an increased respiratory illness through infection-enhancing antibodies or as a result of Th2 polarization and altered cytokine profiles of the immune response following vaccination, which are of specific concern for COVID-19 vaccines, appropriate investigative testing is imperative. In general, phase 1 (vaccine safety) and 2 (dose finding, vaccination schedule) clinical trials can be combined, and combined phase 2/3 trials are recommended to determine safety and efficacy. By applying these fundamental requirements not only for the approval and analysis of clinical trials but also for the regulatory evaluation during the assessment of marketing authorization applications, several efficacious and safe COVID-19 vaccines have been licensed in the EU by unprecedentedly fast and flexible procedures. Procedural and regulatory–scientific aspects of the COVID-19 licensing processes are described in this review.


2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 160
Author(s):  
Marga Janse ◽  
Marcela Trocha ◽  
Jelle Fedema ◽  
Eric Claassen ◽  
Linda Van De Burgwal

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> Chlamydia infections in humans and animals pose a significant burden on health systems worldwide. While widespread screening, adequate treatment, and prevention programs are helpful to increase awareness and improve screening rates, infection rates are rising. A vaccine is necessary to slow increasing rates, manage negative consequences, and prevent possible antibiotic resistance. We present the current landscape regarding the innovations for commercial vaccine development in a “one-health” context.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> We developed a unique dataset containing data of patent documents intended for human and veterinary use, and clinical trials in order to provide a detailed description of the global chlamydia vaccine developments.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Analysis of patents and clinical trials intended for human use presented a vaccine field that is underdeveloped, with no commercial human chlamydia vaccine available, and two potential candidates in a phase 1 clinical trial. Comparing innovations concerning chlamydia vaccine developments for both human and veterinary patents, it was clear that these fields are very different and independent of each other. The field is small, and certain companies and researchers show repeated interest. Partnerships among applicants and those involved in chlamydia vaccine innovation would be an important step to take towards innovating and developing an effective vaccine.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We have shown that North America is considered, by patent application, to hold the most potential for a chlamydia vaccine, specifically against the <em>Chlamydia trachomatis </em>strain. A new vaccine is likely to be a subunit vaccine with components of the major outer membrane protein antigen.</p>


npj Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda Makha Bifani ◽  
Milly M. Choy ◽  
Hwee Cheng Tan ◽  
Eng Eong Ooi

AbstractDengue poses a significant burden of individual health, health systems and the economy in dengue endemic regions. As such, dengue vaccine development has been an active area of research. Previous studies selected attenuated vaccine candidates based on plaque size. However, these candidates led to mixed safety outcome in clinical trials, suggesting it is insufficiently informative as an indicator of dengue virus (DENV) attenuation. In this study, we examined the genome diversity of wild-type DENVs and their attenuated derivatives developed by Mahidol University and tested in phase 1 clinical trials. We found that the attenuated DENVs, in particular the strain under clinical development by Takeda Vaccines, DENV2 PDK53, showed significantly higher genome diversity than its wild-type parent, DENV2 16681. The determinant of genomic diversity was intrinsic to the PDK53 genome as infectious clone of PDK53 showed greater genomic diversity after a single in vitro passage compared to 16681 infectious clone. Similar trends were observed with attenuated DENV1 and DENV4, both of which were shown to be attenuated clinically, but not DENV3 that was not adequately attenuated clinically. Taken together, evidence presented here suggests that genome diversity could be developed into a marker of DENV attenuation.


Pathogens ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 1073
Author(s):  
Juan-Carlos Saiz

West Nile virus (WNV) is a widely distributed enveloped flavivirus transmitted by mosquitoes, which main hosts are birds. The virus sporadically infects equids and humans with serious economic and health consequences, as infected individuals can develop a severe neuroinvasive disease that can even lead to death. Nowadays, no WNV-specific therapy is available and vaccines are only licensed for use in horses but not for humans. While several methodologies for WNV vaccine development have been successfully applied and have contributed to significantly reducing its incidence in horses in the US, none have progressed to phase III clinical trials in humans. This review addresses the status of WNV vaccines for horses, birds, and humans, summarizing and discussing the challenges they face for their clinical advance and their introduction to the market.


Author(s):  
Alexia Iasonos ◽  
John O’Quigley
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Zuzana Strizova ◽  
Jitka Smetanova ◽  
Jirina Bartunkova ◽  
Tomas Milota

The number of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)-infected patients keeps rising in most of the European countries despite the pandemic precaution measures. The current antiviral and anti-inflammatory therapeutic approaches are only supportive, have limited efficacy, and the prevention in reducing the transmission of SARS-CoV-2 virus is the best hope for public health. It is presumed that an effective vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 infection could mobilize the innate and adaptive immune responses and provide a protection against severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) disease. As the race for the effective and safe vaccine has begun, different strategies were introduced. To date, viral vector-based vaccines, genetic vaccines, attenuated vaccines, and protein-based vaccines are the major vaccine types tested in the clinical trials. Over 80 clinical trials have been initiated; however, only 18 vaccines have reached the clinical phase II/III or III, and 4 vaccine candidates are under consideration or have been approved for the use so far. In addition, the protective effect of the off-target vaccines, such as <i>Bacillus</i> Calmette-Guérin and measles vaccine, is being explored in randomized prospective clinical trials with SARS-CoV-2-infected patients. In this review, we discuss the most promising anti-COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials and different vaccination strategies in order to provide more clarity into the ongoing clinical trials.


RMD Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. e001595
Author(s):  
Gerd R Burmester ◽  
Peter Nash ◽  
Bruce E Sands ◽  
Kim Papp ◽  
Lori Stockert ◽  
...  

ObjectivesTo analyse adverse events (AEs) of special interest across tofacitinib clinical programmes in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), psoriatic arthritis (PsA), ulcerative colitis (UC) and psoriasis (PsO), and to determine whether the incidence rates (IRs; unique patients with events per 100 patient-years) of these events are consistent across diseases.MethodsThe analysis included data from patients exposed to ≥1 dose of tofacitinib in phase 1, 2, 3 or 3b/4 clinical trials and long-term extension (LTE) studies (38 trials) in RA (23 trials), PsA (3 trials), UC (5 trials) and PsO (7 trials). All studies were completed by or before July 2019, except for one ongoing UC LTE study (data cut-off May 2019). IRs were obtained for AEs of special interest.Results13 567 patients were included in the analysis (RA: n=7964; PsA: n=783; UC: n=1157; PsO: n=3663), representing 37 066 patient-years of exposure. Maximum duration of exposure was 10.5 years (RA). AEs within the ‘infections and infestations’ System Organ Class were the most common in all diseases. Among AEs of special interest, IRs were highest for herpes zoster (non-serious and serious; 3.6, 1.8, 3.5 and 2.4 for RA, PsA, UC and PsO, respectively) and serious infections (2.5, 1.2, 1.7 and 1.3 for RA, PsA, UC and PsO, respectively). Age-adjusted and sex-adjusted mortality ratios (weighted for country) were ≤0.2 across cohorts.ConclusionsThe tofacitinib safety profile in this analysis was generally consistent across diseases and with longer term follow-up compared with previous analyses.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document