1051. Rapid onset of seroprotection rates in young adults immunized with a tri-antigenic hepatitis B virus (HBV) vaccine compared to a mono-antigenic HBV vaccine

Abstract Background Hepatitis B (HBV) remains a significant public health risk with an estimated 240-350 million people chronically-infected with HBV worldwide. In the US, rates of new HBV infections are highest among individuals aged 30-39 years, highlighting the elevated risk in adults. Moreover, CDC reported that in 2017 only 34.3% of US adults aged 19-49 years were vaccinated against HBV. Younger adults who are at-risk of HBV infection, through exposure in the workplace or home (e.g. healthcare workers, public service sector workers, those living with HBsAb-positive individuals), through travel to countries with high HBV prevalence, or through exposure as a result of high-risk behavior (e.g. injection drug use, risk through sexual transmission), need a highly effective and safe HBV vaccine with a rapid onset of seroprotection. Seroprotection Rates from Phase 3 Studies Methods Four phase 3 studies assessing kinetics of seroprotection rates (SPR; anti-HBs ≥ 10 mIU/mL) in adults aged 18-45 years, vaccinated at months 0, 1 and 6 with 10 µg of tri-antigenic HBV vaccine (TAV) vs. 20 µg of a mono-antigenic HBV vaccine (MAV) were completed between 2008 & 2020: (1) PROTECT study in US, Europe, and Canada, n = 299; (2) CONSTANT study in US, Europe and Canada, n = 2,838; (3) SG-005-05 study in Vietnam, n = 349; (4) 38-13-040 study in Russia, n = 99. One phase 4, single-arm study was conducted with 10 µg of TAV in adults aged 20-40 years: SciB018 study in Israel, n = 83. Results In all five studies, vaccination with TAV achieved SPRs of 87.2-100.0% at month 6 after 2 doses and 99.2-100.0% at month 7 after 3 doses, compared to 39.0-89.4% and 91.1-98.3% achieved with MAV at months 6 and 7, respectively (Fig 1). Moreover, as demonstrated with the data available from two of the controlled studies, TAV induced SPRs of 76.0%-95.9% at month 3 after 2 doses compared to 37.2%-87.2% with MAV. No major safety signals were observed, and adverse events were well-balanced and consistent with the known vaccine safety profiles. Conclusion Tri-antigenic HBV vaccine (TAV) has demonstrated its ability to rapidly, consistently, and safely elicit high SPRs in younger adults across different regions of the world. Disclosures Joanne M. Langley, MD, GSK group of companies (Research Grant or Support)Immunivaccines Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)Janssen (Research Grant or Support)Pfizer (Research Grant or Support)Symvivo (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)VBI Vaccines (Research Grant or Support) Nathalie Machluf, PhD, VBI Vaccines Inc. (Employee) Johanna Spaans, BSc, MSc, VBI Vaccines Inc (Employee) Dave Anderson, PhD, VBI Vaccines (Employee, Shareholder) Vlad Popovic, MD, VBI Vaccines, Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Francisco Diaz-Mitoma, MD, VBI Vaccines, Inc. (Shareholder, Independent Contractor)

Download Full-text

8. Higher hepatitis B antibody titres induced in all adults vaccinated with a tri-antigenic hepatitis B (HBV) vaccine, compared to a mono-antigenic HBV vaccine: results from two pivotal phase 3 double-blind, randomized studies (PROTECT and CONSTANT)

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.053 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S26-S27

Author(s):

Joanne M Langley ◽

Timo Vesikari ◽

Nathalie Machluf ◽

Johanna Spaans ◽

Bebi Yassin-Rajkumar ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Immune Response ◽

Hepatitis B ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Pivotal Phase ◽

Hbv Vaccine ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Antibody Titres ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background More than 2 billion individuals worldwide have evidence of past or current hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection, emphasizing the importance of awareness and need for elimination of HBV infection. Effective vaccination, defined as the induction of protective anti-HBs titres, is a key component of those elimination plans. Magnitude of the immune response to HBV vaccines can be measured by serum levels of anti-HBs, whose persistence and durability is believed to be dependent upon the peak antibody levels reached after completion of vaccinations. CONSTANT and PROTECT: High Hepatitis B antibody titres after vaccination Methods In two phase 3, head-to-head studies of immunogenicity and safety of a tri-antigenic HBV vaccine (TAV) containing 10 µg of full-length HBs (pre-S1 + pre-S2 + S antigens) and a mono-antigenic HBV vaccine (MAV) containing 20 µg of small HBs antigen, subjects were vaccinated at months 0, 1 and 6 with safety follow-up for at least 6 months after the 3rd vaccination. PROTECT, which enrolled 1607 adults age ≥18, demonstrated non-inferiority of seroprotection rates (SPR, defined as the % of participants achieving anti-HBs titres ≥10 mIU/mL) of TAV vs. MAV in adults age ≥ 18 and superiority of SPR in adults age ≥ 45. CONSTANT, which enrolled 2838 adults age 18–45 demonstrated manufacturing equivalence of 3 lots of TAV. In both studies, anti-HBs titres were measured across timepoints and safety was assessed. Results In CONSTANT, at day 168 after two doses, mean anti-HBs titers (mIU/mL) induced across the 3 lots of TAV were > 7.5x those induced with MAV [113–124 vs. 15]. At day 196, after the 3rd dose, mean anti-HBs titers induced with TAV remained substantially higher than those induced with MAV [4855–5979 vs. 1526] (Fig A). In PROTECT, anti-HBs titers were 6x higher in all subjects ≥ 18 year at day 196 [1148 vs. 193] with TAV and 5-8x higher in key subgroups compared to MAV, regardless of age, BMI, or diabetic status (Fig B). Adverse events were well-balanced and consistent with known vaccine safety profiles. Conclusion In the two pivotal phase 3 studies, TAV demonstrated its ability to rapidly elicit higher anti-HBs titres compared to MAV, in all study subject populations, reflecting the very strong immune response to TAV, which may be an important predictor of the persistence and durability of seroprotection. Disclosures Joanne M. Langley, MD, GSK group of companies (Research Grant or Support)Immunivaccines Inc (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)Janssen (Research Grant or Support)Pfizer (Research Grant or Support)Symvivo (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)VBI Vaccines (Research Grant or Support) Nathalie Machluf, PhD, VBI Vaccines Inc. (Employee) Johanna Spaans, BSc, MSc, VBI Vaccines Inc (Employee) Dave Anderson, PhD, VBI Vaccines (Employee, Shareholder) Vlad Popovic, MD, VBI Vaccines, Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Francisco Diaz-Mitoma, MD, VBI Vaccines, Inc. (Shareholder, Independent Contractor)

Download Full-text

19. The Impact of Investigational Purified Microbiome Therapeutic SER-109 on Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) of Patients with Recurrent Clostridioides difficile Infection (rCDI) in ECOSPOR III, a Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.019 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S13-S13

Author(s):

Elizabeth Hohmann ◽

Paul Feuerstadt ◽

Caterina Oneto ◽

Charles Berenson ◽

Christine Lee ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Treatment Group ◽

Clinical Outcome ◽

Board Member ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Research Support ◽

Independent Contractor ◽

Study Investigator ◽

The Impact ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Following standard of care antibiotics, investigational microbiome therapeutic, SER-109, achieved superiority vs placebo (PBO) at 8 weeks in reducing rCDI in patients with ≥3 prior episodes (12.4% vs 39.8%, respectively; p< 0.001). We evaluated the impact of SER-109 vs PBO on HRQoL with general (EQ-5D-5L) and disease-specific (Cdiff32) measures [Garey 2016]. Methods EQ-5D-5L measures outcomes in 5 domains (mobility, self-care, activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression) while Cdiff32 measures outcomes in 3 domains (physical, mental, and social) including 5 associated subdomains. Patients completed EQ-5D-5L and Cdiff32 measures at baseline (BL), Wk 8, and at recurrence/early termination. Changes from BL were assessed between SER-109 vs PBO and by clinical outcome (recurrence versus nonrecurrence) in the ITT population and within each treatment arm. The between treatment group comparison analysis controlled for age, gender, prior antibiotics, and number of prior CDI episodes. Results Mean EQ-5D-5L and Cdiff32 scores were comparable between SER-109 and PBO at BL. EQ-5D-5L did not detect differences at Wk 8 from BL between SER-109 and PBO or by clinical outcome. In contrast, Cdiff32 detected significant improvements at Wk 8 from BL within both SER-109 subjects and PBO subjects (Fig1) and by recurrence status (Fig2). Subjects achieved significant improvement in all domains at Wk 8 from BL regardless of treatment group. When examining recurrence status within treatment arms, all PBO subjects with non-recurrence showed improvement in all health domains, while PBO subjects with recurrence had declines in several subdomains (Fig3B). Similarly, SER-109 subjects with non-recurrence showed improvement in all domains compared to BL. However, overall and mental domain/subdomains scores also improved in SER-109 subjects with recurrence (Fig3A). Conclusion Significant HRQoL improvements were associated with CDI nonrecurrence, which highlights the negative impact of this debilitating infection. SER-109 was associated with improved overall and mental scores, regardless of clinical outcome. Further investigation is warranted on the impact of SER-109 on mental health even among those with CDI recurrence. Disclosures Elizabeth Hohmann, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Research Grant or Support) Paul Feuerstadt, MD, FACG, Ferring/Rebiotix Pharmaceuticals (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Speaker’s Bureau)Finch Pharmaceuticals (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Merck and Co (Speaker’s Bureau)SERES Therapeutics (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Takeda Pharmaceuticals (Consultant) Christine Lee, MD, FRCPC, Pfizer (Board Member)Rebiotix-Ferring (Board Member)Rebiotix-Ferring (Grant/Research Support)Seres (Grant/Research Support)Summit (Grant/Research Support) Sissi Pham, PharmD, Seres (Consultant) Pat Ray Reese, PhD, Reese Associates, LLC (Consultant, Independent Contractor) Elaine E. Wang, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee) Elaine E. Wang, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Lisa von Moltke, MD, Seres Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Kevin W. Garey, Pharm.D., M.S., FASHP, Summit Therapeutics (Research Grant or Support)

Download Full-text

1248. Efficacy and Safety of Oral Ibrexafungerp in 41 Patients with Refractory Fungal Diseases, Interim Analysis of a Phase 3 Open-label Study (FURI)

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1432 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S642-S642

Author(s):

Barbara D Alexander ◽

Oliver Cornely ◽

Peter Pappas ◽

Rachel Miller ◽

Jose A Vazquez ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Research Support ◽

Open Label ◽

Review Panel ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Material Support ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Candida infections resistant to currently available antifungals are an emerging global threat. Ibrexafungerp is an investigational broad-spectrum glucan synthase inhibitor antifungal with activity against Candida and Aspergillus species, including azole- and echinocandin-resistant strains. A Phase 3 open-label, single-arm study of oral ibrexafungerp (FURI) (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT03059992) is ongoing for the treatment of patients (≥18 years) with fungal diseases who are intolerant of or refractory to standard antifungal therapies. Methods An independent Data Review Committee (DRC) provided an assessment of treatment response for 41 patients. Patients were enrolled in 22 centers from 6 countries. Patients were eligible for enrollment if they had proven or probable, invasive or severe mucocutaneous candidiasis and documented evidence of failure of, intolerance to, or toxicity related to a currently approved standard-of-care antifungal treatment or could not receive approved oral antifungal options (e.g., susceptibility of the organism) and a continued IV antifungal therapy was undesirable or unfeasible. Results The 41 patients assessed had the following infection types: intra-abdominal abscesses, oropharyngeal candidiasis, esophageal candidiasis, candidemia, and others. The DRC adjudicated 23 patients (56%) as achieving complete or partial response, 11 patients (27%) maintaining stable disease, 6 patients (15%) with progression of disease and one case was considered as indeterminate. The efficacy of oral ibrexafungerp by pathogen is shown in Table 1. Ibrexafungerp was well-tolerated with the most common treatment-related adverse events being of gastrointestinal origin. No deaths due to progression of fungal disease were reported. Table 1: Ibrexafungerp Outcomes by Pathogen Conclusion Preliminary analysis of these 41 cases indicate that oral ibrexafungerp provides a favorable therapeutic response in the majority of patients with difficult to treat Candida spp. infections, including those caused by non-albicans Candida species. Disclosures Barbara D. Alexander, MD, MHS, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Employee, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Oliver Cornely, Prof., Actelion (Grant/Research Support)Actelion (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Al Jazeera Pharmaceuticals (Consultant)Allecra Therapeutics (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Amplyx (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Amplyx (Grant/Research Support)Astellas (Grant/Research Support)Astellas (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Basilea (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Basilea (Grant/Research Support)Biosys UK Limited (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Cidara (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Cidara (Grant/Research Support)Da Volterra (Grant/Research Support)Da Volterra (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Entasis (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)F2G (Other Financial or Material Support)F2G (Grant/Research Support)Gilead (Grant/Research Support)Gilead (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Grupo Biotoscana (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Janssen Pharmaceuticals (Grant/Research Support)Matinas (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Medicines Company (Grant/Research Support)MedPace (Grant/Research Support)MedPace (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Melinta Therapeutics (Grant/Research Support)Menarini Ricerche (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Merck/MSD (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Merck/MSD (Grant/Research Support)Mylan Pharmaceuticals (Consultant)Nabriva Therapeutics (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Octapharma (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Paratek Pharmaceuticals (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Pfizer (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Pfizer (Grant/Research Support)PSI (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Rempex (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Roche Diagnostics (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Scynexis (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Scynexis (Grant/Research Support)Seres Therapeutics (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees)Tetraphase (Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees) Peter Pappas, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Consultant, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support) Rachel Miller, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Luis Ostrosky-Zeichner, MD, Amplyx (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Astellas (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Other Financial or Material Support, Non-branded educational speaking)Biotoscana (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, Non-branded educational speaking)Cidara (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)F2G (Consultant)Gilead (Consultant)Mayne (Consultant)Octapharma (Consultant)Pfizer (Other Financial or Material Support, Non-branded educational speaking)Scynexis (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Stendhal (Consultant)Viracor (Consultant) Andrej Spec, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member) Riina Rautemaa-Richardson, DDS, PhD, FRCPath, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Robert Krause, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Caryn Morse, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) John W. Sanders, III, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Andes, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member) George Lyon, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Francisco M. Marty, MD, Allovir (Consultant)Amplyx (Consultant)Ansun (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Avir (Consultant)Cidara (Scientific Research Study Investigator)F2G (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Kyorin (Consultant)Merck (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)New England Journal of Medicine (Other Financial or Material Support, Honorarium for Video)Regeneron (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)ReViral (Consultant)Scynexis (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Symbio (Consultant)Takeda (Scientific Research Study Investigator)United Medical (Consultant)WHISCON (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Marisa H. Miceli, MD, FIDSA, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Advisor or Review Panel member) Thomas F. Patterson, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Advisor or Review Panel member) Martin Hoenigl, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member) Nkechi Azie, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) David A. Angulo, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)

Download Full-text

1174. Phase 3 Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Immunogenicity of Catch-up Vaccination Regimens of V114 in Healthy Infants, Children, and Adolescents (PNEU–PLAN)

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1367 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S678-S678

Author(s):

Natalie Banniettis ◽

Jacek Wysocki ◽

Leszek Szenborn ◽

Wanatpreeya Phongsamart ◽

Punnee Pitisuttithum ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Healthy Children ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Catch Up ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Despite widespread use of pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) in children, morbidity and mortality caused by pneumococcal disease (PD) remain high, in part due to the emergence of disease caused by non-vaccine serotypes (STs). In addition, many children do not receive the recommended number of PCVs on schedule and, therefore, are at risk for PD. V114 is an investigational 15-valent PCV that contains two epidemiologically important STs, 22F and 33F, in addition to the 13 STs present in the licensed 13-valent PCV (PCV13; Prevnar 13™). This Phase 3 descriptive study evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of V114 and PCV13 when given as catch-up vaccination in children who are pneumococcal vaccine-naïve or previously immunized with lower valency PCVs. Methods Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for 14 days after each vaccination. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were collected throughout study participation. Immunogenicity was evaluated by anti-pneumococcal polysaccharide ST-specific immunoglobulin G (IgG) geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) at 30 days post-last vaccination. Results 606 healthy children, aged 7 months through 17 years, were randomized (double-blind) to receive V114 (n=303) or PCV13 (n=303) via age-appropriate catch-up vaccination schedules (Table 1). V114 had an acceptable safety profile and was well tolerated. Similar proportions of children aged 7–11 months and 2–17 years reported AEs in the V114 and PCV13 groups. A larger proportion of children aged 12–23 months reported AEs in the V114 group (79%) than the PCV13 group (59%). The proportion of children who reported SAEs was comparable among vaccination groups (V114 and PCV13, respectively, 7–11 months: 10.9%, 7.8%; 12–23 months: 6.5%, 6.3%; 2–17 years: 2.3%, 2.3%). No SAEs were reported to be vaccine-related, and no deaths occurred. At 30 days after the last PCV dose, ST-specific IgG GMCs were comparable for the 13 shared STs and were higher in the V114 group for 22F and 33F. Table 1. Catch-up vaccination schedules in V114-024 Conclusion Catch-up vaccination with V114 in healthy children aged 7 months through 17 years had an acceptable safety profile, was well tolerated, and provided comparable immune responses to the 13 serotypes shared with PCV13, and higher immune responses to serotypes 22F and 33F. Disclosures Natalie Banniettis, MD, Merck Sharp and Dohme (Employee, Shareholder) Jacek Wysocki, MD, PhD, GlaxoSmithKline (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)MSD (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)Pfizer (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support) Mika Rämet, MD, PhD, MSD (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Ron Dagan, MD, Medimmune/AstraZeneca (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)MSD (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker’s Bureau)Pfizer (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support, Speaker’s Bureau) Lori Good, B.S., Merck & Co., Inc (Employee) Melanie Papa, BA, Merck Sharp and Dohme (Employee, Shareholder) Yaru Shi, PhD, Merck & Co., Inc (Employee) Luwy Musey, MD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee) Kara Bickham, MD, Merck Sharp and Dohme (Employee, Shareholder) Gretchen Tamms, B.S., Merck Sharp and Dohme (Employee, Shareholder) Richard McFetridge, B.S., Merck & Co., Inc (Employee) Robert Lupinacci, M.S, Merck & Co., Inc (Employee, Shareholder)

Download Full-text

40. Lenzilumab Efficacy and Safety in Newly Hospitalized COVID-19 Subjects: Results From a Phase 3 Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.040 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S29-S29

Author(s):

Zelalem Temesgem ◽

Charles Burger ◽

Jason Baker ◽

Christopher Polk ◽

Claudia R Libertin ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Controlled Trial ◽

Invasive Mechanical Ventilation ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Research Support ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Double Blind ◽

Gm Csf ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) often results from the immune-mediated cytokine storm, triggered by granulocyte macrophage-colony stimulating factor (GM-CSF), potentially leading to respiratory failure and death. Lenzilumab, a novel anti-human GM-CSF monoclonal antibody, neutralizes GM-CSF and demonstrated potential to improve clinical outcomes in a matched case-cohort study of patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. This Phase 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial investigated the efficacy and safety of lenzilumab to improve the likelihood of survival without invasive mechanical ventilation (SWOV), beyond available treatments. Methods Hypoxic patients, hospitalized with COVID-19 (n=520), requiring supplemental oxygen, but not invasive mechanical ventilation, were randomized on Day 0 to receive lenzilumab (1800mg, n=261) or placebo (n=259), and available treatments, including remdesivir and/or corticosteroids; and were followed through Day 28. Results Baseline demographics were comparable between groups: male, 64.7%; mean age, 60.5 years; median CRP, 79.0 mg/L. Patients across both groups received steroids (93.7%), remdesivir (72.4%), or both (69.1%). Lenzilumab improved the primary endpoint, likelihood of SWOV in the mITT population, by 1.54-fold (HR: 1.54; 95%CI: 1.02-2.32, p=0.0403). Lenzilumab improved SWOV by 1.91-fold (nominal p=0.0073) and 1.92-fold (nominal p=0.0067) in patients receiving remdesivir or remdesivir and corticosteroids, respectively. A key secondary endpoint of incidence of IMV, ECMO or death was also improved in patients receiving remdesivir (p=0.020) or remdesivir and corticosteroids (p=0.0180). Treatment-emergent serious adverse events were similar across both groups. Conclusion Lenzilumab significantly improved SWOV in hypoxic COVID-19 patients upon hospitalization, with the greatest benefit observed in patients receiving treatment with remdesivir and corticosteroids. NCT04351152 Disclosures Zelalem Temesgem, MD, Humanigen, Inc (Grant/Research Support) Jason Baker, MD, Humanigen, Inc (Grant/Research Support) Christopher Polk, MD, Atea (Research Grant or Support)Gilead (Advisor or Review Panel member, Research Grant or Support)Humanigen (Research Grant or Support)Regeneron (Research Grant or Support) Claudia R. Libertin, MD, Gilead (Grant/Research Support) Colleen F. Kelley, MD, MPH, Gilead Sciences (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support; Moderna (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support; Novavax (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support; Viiv (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support Vincent Marconi, MD, Bayer (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Eli Lilly (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Gilead Sciences (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)ViiV (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator) Victoria Catterson, PhD, Humanigen, Inc (Consultant) William Aronstein, MD, PhD, Humanigen, Inc (Consultant) Cameron Durrant, MD, Humanigen, Inc (Employee) Dale Chappell, MD, Humanigen, Inc (Employee) Omar Ahmed, PharmD, Humanigen, Inc (Employee) Gabrielle Chappell, MSc, Humanigen, Inc (Consultant) Andrew Badley, M.D., AbbVie (Consultant) for the LIVE-AIR Study Group, n/a, Humanigen, Inc (Grant/Research Support)

Download Full-text

1510. Infant Pneumonia and Subsequent Risk of Chronic Respiratory Disorders

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1691 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S758-S759

Author(s):

Stephen I Pelton ◽

Rotem Lapidot ◽

Matthew Wasserman ◽

Melody Shaff ◽

Ahuva Hanau ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Airway Disease ◽

Research Support ◽

Recurrent Wheezing ◽

Recurrent Pneumonia ◽

Respiratory Disorders ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Study Population ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in infancy (i.e., among children aged < 2 years) may have long-term consequences for the rapidly developing lung. We examined the impact of pneumonia in infancy on subsequent respiratory health. Methods A retrospective matched-cohort design and data from Optum’s de-identified Integrated Claims-Clinical dataset (2009-2018) were employed. Study population comprised children who were hospitalized for CAP before age 2 years (“CAP patients”) as well as matched comparators without evidence of pneumonia before age 2 years (“comparison patients”). CAP patients and comparison patients were matched (fixed 1:5 ratio, without replacement) using estimated propensity scores and a nearest-neighbor approach; those with evidence of selected medical conditions (e.g., extreme prematurity, congenital diseases, respiratory diseases) before age 2 years were excluded. Study outcomes included recurrent pneumonia and a composite of asthma, recurrent wheezing, and hyperactive airway disease. Rates of study outcomes from age 2 to 5 years were estimated for all CAP and comparison patients as well as subgroups of CAP patients (and corresponding comparison patients) stratified by etiology (bacterial, viral, unspecified). Results Study population totaled 1,343 CAP patients and 6,715 comparison patients. CAP patients and comparison patients were well-balanced on their baseline characteristics and mean duration of follow-up was 757 and 729 days, respectively. Rates of chronic respiratory disorders from age 2 to 5 years were significantly higher among CAP patients versus comparison patients. Analyses of subgroups stratified by etiology demonstrated higher rates of study outcomes among CAP patients across all strata. Rates of recurrent pneumonia and a composite of asthma, recurrent wheezing, and hyperactive airway disease from age 2 to 5 years among CAP patients and matched comparison patients Conclusion Infant CAP foreshadows an increase in subsequent risk of chronic respiratory disorders. Further studies are needed to determine whether this elevated risk is due to infant pneumonia or whether infant pneumonia is a marker of at-risk children. Disclosures Stephen I. Pelton, MD, Merck vaccine (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Pfizer (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Sanofi Pasteur (Consultant, Other Financial or Material Support, DSMB)Seqirus Vaccine Ltd. (Consultant) Rotem Lapidot, MD, MSCI, Pfizer (Consultant) Matthew Wasserman, MSc., Pfizer Inc. (Employee) Melody Shaff, BA, Pfizer, Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Ahuva Hanau, BS, Pfizer, Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Alexander Lonshteyn, PhD, Pfizer, Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support) Derek Weycker, PhD, Pfizer Inc. (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)

Download Full-text

120. An open-label comparative trial of SUBA-itraconazole (SUBA) versus conventional itraconazole (c-itra) for treatment of proven and probable endemic mycoses (MSG-15): a pharmacokinetic (PK) and adverse Event (AE) analysis

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.120 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S72-S72

Author(s):

Peter G Pappas ◽

Andrej Spec ◽

Marisa Miceli ◽

Gerald McGwin ◽

Rachel McMullen ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Serum Levels ◽

Research Support ◽

Open Label ◽

Review Panel ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Endemic Mycoses ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background C-itra is the drug of choice for treatment of most non-CNS, non-life-threatening forms of endemic mycoses (EM), including histoplasmosis, blastomycosis, coccidioidomycosis, sporotrichosis and talaromycosis. SUBA represents a new formulation of itraconazole that utilizes nanotechnology to improve bioavailability when administered orally. SUBA is formulated as nanoparticles allowing for absorption in the small bowel while not relying on gastric acidity for optimal absorption. MSG-15 is an open-label, comparative clinical trial comparing SUBA to c-itra for the treatment of EM. Herein we report the final PK and AE profiles of these two compounds. Methods Subjects with proven and probable EM were eligible this open-label comparative study. The protocol allowed up to 14 d of prior therapy with any antifungal for this episode of EM. Subjects were randomized to receive either SUBA 130 mg po bid or c-itra 200 mg po bid for up to 6 months. Follow up occurred at 7, 14, 28, 42, 84 and 180 d post-enrollment. PK samples were obtained at 7, 14, and 42 d. Clinical assessment, including symptom assessment, AEs, overall drug tolerance, and quality of life were assessed at each visit. We used descriptive statistics for this analysis. Results 89 subjects with EM entered the trial, including 43 on SUBA and 46 on c-itra. We measured PK serum levels of itra and hydroxyl-itra at days 7, 14, and 42 and these data are depicted in Figures 1-3. There were no significant differences in these levels, including combined itra/hydroxyl-itra levels, among the two study arms. AUC for itra and hydroxyl-itra were similar for both arms. AEs as assessed at each study evaluation were also quite similar among the two study arms. Overall, any AE occurred in 74% vs 85% of SUBA and c-itra recipients, respectively (NS). Drug-related AEs occurred in 35% vs 41% of SUBA and itra recipients, respectively (NS). Most common drug-related AEs included cardiovascular (edema and hypertension), nausea and loss of appetite. Combined Itraconazole and Hydroxy-itraconazole Concentration Over Time Conclusion Compared to c-itra, SUBA demonstrates almost identical serum levels despite being dosed at roughly 60% standard dosing for c-itra (130 mg po bid vs 200 mg po bid). SUBA is slightly better tolerated than c-itra, although the specific AEs are similar. Disclosures Peter G. Pappas, MD, Astellas (Research Grant or Support)Cidara (Research Grant or Support)F2G (Consultant)Matinas (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Mayne Pharma (Research Grant or Support)Scynexis (Research Grant or Support) Andrej Spec, MD, MSCI, Mayne Pharma (Grant/Research Support) Marisa Miceli, MD, SCYNEXIS, Inc. (Advisor or Review Panel member) George R. R. Thompson III, III, MD, Amplyx (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Appili (Consultant)Astellas (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Avir (Grant/Research Support)Cidara (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)F2G (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Mayne (Consultant, Grant/Research Support)Merck (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Pfizer (Advisor or Review Panel member)

Download Full-text

548. Baseline characteristics associated with clinical improvement and mortality in hospitalized patients with moderate COVID-19

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.742 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S340-S340

Author(s):

Antonella Castagna ◽

David Shu Cheong Hui ◽

Kathleen M Mullane ◽

Mamta Jain ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Improvement ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Hospitalized Patients ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Baseline Characteristics ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Remdesivir (RDV) has been shown to shorten recovery time and was well tolerated in patients with severe COVID-19. Here we report baseline characteristics associated with clinical improvement at day (d) 14. Methods We enrolled hospitalized patients with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, oxygen saturation >94% on room air, and radiological evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive 5d or 10d of intravenous RDV once daily plus standard of care (SoC), or SoC only. For this analysis, patients were followed through discharge, d14, or death. Baseline demographic and disease characteristics associated with clinical improvement in oxygen support (≥2-point improvement on a 7-category ordinal scale ranging from discharge to death) were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression methods. Results 584 patients were randomized and treated (5/10d RDV, n=384; SoC: n=200). 159 (27%) were ≥65y, 227 (39%) female, 328 (61%) white, 102 (19%) Asian, and 99 (19%) Black. 252 participants (43%) were enrolled in Europe, 260 (45%) North America (NA), and 72 (12%) in Asia. Most patients (483 [83%]) were not on supplemental oxygen but required medical care at baseline. In a multivariable model, 5/10d RDV was significantly positively associated with clinical improvement (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.69, 95% CI: 1.08, 2.65; p=0.0226). Significant covariables positively associated with clinical improvement included age < 65y (p< 0.0001) and region of treatment (Europe and NA vs Asia, p< 0.0001 each; Table); other examined factors were not significantly associated with clinical improvement, including gender, race, ethnicity, baseline oxygen support, duration of symptoms and hospitalization, obesity, and baseline transaminase levels. Table 1. Conclusion In moderate COVID-19 patients, after adjusting for treatment arm, age < 65y and region (NA vs Asia; Europe vs Asia) were associated with higher rates of clinical improvement. These observations recapitulate younger age as positive prognostic factor, and highlight the differences in the impact of the pandemic globally. Disclosures Antonella Castagna, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Shu Cheong Hui, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Kathleen M. Mullane, DO, PharmD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator) Mamta Jain, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)GlaxoSmithKline (Advisor or Review Panel member)Janssen (Research Grant or Support)Merck (Research Grant or Support) Massimo Galli, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member, Other Financial or Material Support, Personal fees) Shan-Chwen Chang, MD, PhD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Robert H. Hyland, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Devi SenGupta, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Huyen Cao, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Hailin Huang, PhD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Anand Chokkalingam, PhD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Anu Osinusi, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Diana M. Brainard, MD, Gilead Sciences (Employee) Christoph Lübbert, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Chien Boon Lye, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) David Chien Boon Lye, MD, NO DISCLOSURE DATA Judith A. Aberg, MD, Theratechnology (Consultant) Enrique Navas Elorza, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator) Karen T. Tashima, MD, Bristol-Myers Squibb (Research Grant or Support)Gilead Sciences Inc. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)GlaxoSmithKline (Research Grant or Support)Merck (Research Grant or Support)Tibotec (Research Grant or Support)Viiv Healthcare (Research Grant or Support) Mark McPhail, MD, Gilead Sciences Inc. (Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text

1340. The Burden of Influenza and Rhinovirus Among Hospitalized Adults Post the COVID-19 Pandemic

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1532 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S757-S758

Author(s):

Olivia D Reese ◽

Ashley Tippett ◽

Laila Hussaini ◽

Luis Salazar ◽

Megan Taylor ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Healthy Controls ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Tract Infections ◽

The Impact ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background Acute respiratory tract infections (ARIs) are a significant cause of morbidity in adults. Influenza is associated with about 490,600 hospitalizations and 34,200 deaths in the US in the 2018-2019 season. The burden of rhinovirus among adults hospitalized with ARI is less well known. We compared the burden of influenza and rhinovirus from 2 consecutive winter respiratory viral seasons in hospitalized adults and healthy controls pre-COVID-19 and one season mid-COVID-19 to determine the impact of rhinovirus as a pathogen. Methods From Oct 2018 to Apr 2021, prospective surveillance of adults ≥50 years old admitted with ARI or COPD/CHF exacerbations at any age was conducted at two Atlanta hospitals. Adults were eligible if they lived within an eight-county region around Atlanta and if their symptom duration was < 14 days. In the seasons from Oct 2018 to Mar 2020, asymptomatic adults ≥50 years old were enrolled as controls. Standard of care test results were included and those enrolled contributed nasopharyngeal swabs that were tested for respiratory pathogens using BioFire® FilmArray® Respiratory Viral Panel (RVP). Results During the first two seasons, 1566 hospitalized adults were enrolled. Rhinovirus was detected in 7.5% (118) and influenza was detected in 7.7% (121). Rhinovirus was also detected in 2.2% of 466 healthy adult controls while influenza was detected in 0%. During Season 3, the peak of the COVID-19 pandemic, influenza declined to 0% of ARI hospitalizations. Rhinovirus also declined (p=0.01) but still accounted for 5.1% of all ARIs screened (Figure 1). Rhinovirus was detected at a greater rate in Season 3 than in asymptomatic controls in the first 2 seasons (p=0.008). In the first two seasons, Influenza was detected in 8.6% (24/276) of those admitted to the ICU. Rhinovirus was detected in 6.1% (17/276) of those admitted to the ICU but declined to 3.1% (8/258) in Season 3. Figure 1. Percent Positive Cases of Influenza and Rhinovirus between Season 1&2 (hospitalized and healthy controls) vs Season 3 (hospitalized) Conclusion Dramatic declines occurred in influenza in adults hospitalized with ARI, CHF, or COPD in Atlanta during the COVID-19 pandemic and with enhanced public health measures. Although rhinovirus declined during the COVID-19 pandemic, it continued to be identified at a rate higher than in historical controls. Additional data are needed to understand the role of rhinovirus in adult ARI, CHF, and COPD exacerbations. Disclosures David L. Swerdlow, MD, Pfizer Vaccines (Employee) Robin Hubler, MS, Pfizer Inc. (Employee) Christina A. Rostad, MD, BioFire Inc, GSK, MedImmune, Micron, Janssen, Merck, Moderna, Novavax, PaxVax, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi-Pasteur. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)Meissa Vaccines (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-inventor of patented RSV vaccine technology unrelated to this manuscript, which has been licensed to Meissa Vaccines, Inc.) Larry Anderson, MD, ADVI (Consultant)Bavarian Nordic (Consultant)Novavax (Consultant)Phizer (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sciogen (Research Grant or Support) Nadine Rouphael, MD, pfizer, sanofi, lily, quidel, merck (Grant/Research Support) Nadine Rouphael, MD, Lilly (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory Study PI, Grant/Research Support; Merck (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory study PI, Grant/Research Support; Pfizer: I conduct as co-PI the RSV PFIZER study at Emory, Research Grant; Pfizer (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support, I conduct as co-PI the RSV PFIZER study at Emory; Quidel (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory Study PI, Grant/Research Support; Sanofi Pasteur (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Chair phase 3 COVID vaccine, Grant/Research Support Evan J. Anderson, MD, GSK (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Janssen (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)Kentucky Bioprocessing, Inc (Advisor or Review Panel member)MedImmune (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Medscape (Consultant)Merck (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Micron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)PaxVax (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Pfizer (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi Pasteur (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text

1334. Outcomes Among Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 Infection in Hospitalized Adults Age ≥ 50 Years and with Underlying Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) or Congestive Heart Failure (CHF)

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1526 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽

pp. S755-S755

Author(s):

Megan Taylor ◽

Ashley Tippett ◽

Laila Hussaini ◽

Luis Salazar ◽

Caroline Ciric ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Nursing Home ◽

Research Study ◽

Scientific Research ◽

Panel Member ◽

Research Support ◽

Review Panel ◽

Icu Admission ◽

Study Investigator ◽

Significant Burden ◽

Research Grant

Abstract Background A significant burden of disease exists for adults infected with influenza (flu) and SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19. However, data are limited comparing outcomes between hospitalized adults infected with these viruses. Methods Over the course of 3 consecutive winter respiratory viral seasons, adults ≥ 50 years of age admitted with acute respiratory tract infections (ARI) and adults of any age with COPD or CHF-related admissions were enrolled from 2 Atlanta area hospitals. For the 2018-19 and 2019-20 seasons, participants were approached in the hospital. If the participant enrolled, nasopharyngeal (NP) and oropharyngeal (OP) swabs were collected and tested using BioFire® FilmArray® respiratory panel. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020-21 and limitations involving participant contact, only NP standard of care (SOC) swabs were collected. A comprehensive medical chart review was completed for each subject which encompassed data on their hospitalization, past medical history, and vaccination history. Co-infected patients were excluded from the analyses. Results Of the eligible participants, 118 were flu positive (three RSV-influenza co-infections were excluded) and 527 were COVID-19 positive. Median age was lower for the flu cohort at 62 (IQR 56-71) than those with COVID-19 (67, IQR 59-77) (p < 0.0001). Length of stay (LOS) was shorter in flu-infected patients (median 3 d, IQR 2-6), but was longer for COVID-19 patients (median 5 d, IQR 3-10). ICU admission occurred in 20% of those with flu, and among those admitted to the ICU mechanical ventilation (MV) occurred in 12.5%. ICU admission and MV was significantly higher for those with COVID-19, with 28% of patients admitted to the ICU and 47% of those requiring MV. Among patients with COVID-19, 8.9% died. This was significantly higher than that of flu (3.4%) (p=0.008). Hospital discharge occurred more frequently to a nursing home or LTCF with COVID-19 (10.3%) than with flu (0%) (p< 0.0001). Table 1. Breakdown of age, hospitalization course, and discharge disposition for participants diagnosed with influenza or COVID-19 during hospitalization. Conclusion COVID-19 resulted in a longer hospital admission, a greater chance of ICU admission and MV as compared to flu. Additionally, COVID-19 participants had a high rate of discharge to a nursing home/LTCF and a significantly higher risk of death. While the clinical course was not as severe as COVID-19, influenza contributed a significant burden. Disclosures David L. Swerdlow, MD, Pfizer Vaccines (Employee) Robin Hubler, MS, Pfizer Inc. (Employee) Christina A. Rostad, MD, BioFire Inc, GSK, MedImmune, Micron, Janssen, Merck, Moderna, Novavax, PaxVax, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi-Pasteur. (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Research Grant or Support)Meissa Vaccines (Other Financial or Material Support, Co-inventor of patented RSV vaccine technology unrelated to this manuscript, which has been licensed to Meissa Vaccines, Inc.) Larry Anderson, MD, ADVI (Consultant)Bavarian Nordic (Consultant)Novavax (Consultant)Phizer (Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sciogen (Research Grant or Support) Nadine Rouphael, MD, pfizer, sanofi, lily, quidel, merck (Grant/Research Support) Nadine Rouphael, MD, Lilly (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory Study PI, Grant/Research Support; Merck (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory study PI, Grant/Research Support; Pfizer: I conduct as co-PI the RSV PFIZER study at Emory, Research Grant; Pfizer (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Grant/Research Support, I conduct as co-PI the RSV PFIZER study at Emory; Quidel (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Emory Study PI, Grant/Research Support; Sanofi Pasteur (Individual(s) Involved: Self): Chair phase 3 COVID vaccine, Grant/Research Support Evan J. Anderson, MD, GSK (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Janssen (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator, Advisor or Review Panel member)Kentucky Bioprocessing, Inc (Advisor or Review Panel member)MedImmune (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Medscape (Consultant)Merck (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Micron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)PaxVax (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Pfizer (Consultant, Grant/Research Support, Scientific Research Study Investigator)Regeneron (Scientific Research Study Investigator)Sanofi Pasteur (Consultant, Scientific Research Study Investigator)

Download Full-text