PT - JOURNAL ARTICLE AU - Vivek Shinde AU - Iksung Cho AU - Joyce S. Plested AU - Sapeckshita Agrawal AU - Jamie Fiske AU - Rongman Cai AU - Haixia Zhou AU - Xuan Pham AU - Mingzhu Zhu AU - Shane Cloney-Clark AU - Nan Wang AU - Bin Zhou AU - Maggie Lewis AU - Patty Price-Abbott AU - Nita Patel AU - Michael J Massare AU - Gale Smith AU - Cheryl Keech AU - Louis Fries AU - Gregory M Glenn TI - Comparison of the Safety and Immunogenicity of a Novel Matrix-M-adjuvanted Nanoparticle Influenza Vaccine with a Quadrivalent Seasonal Influenza Vaccine in Older Adults: A Randomized Controlled Trial AID - 10.1101/2020.08.07.20170514 DP - 2020 Jan 01 TA - medRxiv PG - 2020.08.07.20170514 4099 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/11/2020.08.07.20170514.short 4100 - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/08/11/2020.08.07.20170514.full AB - Background Improved seasonal influenza vaccines for older adults are urgently needed, which can induce broadly cross-reactive antibodies and enhanced T-cell responses, particularly against A(H3N2) viruses, while avoiding egg-adaptive antigenic changes.Methods We randomized 2654 clinically-stable, community-dwelling adults ≥65 years of age 1:1 to receive a single intramuscular dose of either Matrix-M-adjuvanted quadrivalent nanoparticle influenza vaccine (qNIV) or a licensed inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4) in this randomized, observer-blinded, active-comparator controlled trial conducted during the 2019-2020 influenza season. The primary objectives were to demonstrate the non-inferior immunogenicity of qNIV relative to IIV4 against 4 vaccine-homologous strains, based on Day 28 hemagglutination-inhibiting (HAI) antibody responses, described as geometric mean titers and seroconversion rate difference between treatment groups, and to describe the safety of qNIV. Cell-mediated immune (CMI) responses were measured by intracellular cytokine analysis.Findings qNIV demonstrated immunologic non-inferiority to IIV4 against 4 vaccine-homologous strains as assessed by egg-based HAI antibody responses. Corresponding wild-type HAI antibody responses by qNIV were significantly higher than IIV4 against all 4 vaccine-homologous strains (22-66% increased) and against 6 heterologous A(H3N2) strains (34-46% increased), representing multiple genetically and/or antigenically distinct clades/subclades (all p-values <0.001). qNIV induced 3.·1- to 3·9- and 4·0- to 4·9-fold increases in various polyfunctional phenotypes of antigen-specific effector CD4+ T-cells against A(H3N2) and B/Victoria strains at Day 7 post-vaccination, respectively, while corresponding fold-rises induced by IIV4 at Day 7 were 1·3-1·4 and 1·7-2·0; representing a 126-189% improvement in CMI responses for qNIV (all p-values <0·001). Local reactogenicity, primarily mild to moderate and transient pain, was higher in the qNIV group.Interpretation qNIV was well tolerated and produced a qualitatively and quantitatively enhanced humoral and cellular immune response in older adults. These enhancements may be critical to improving the effectiveness of currently licensed influenza vaccines.Funding Novavax.Competing Interest StatementAll co-authors are or were employees of Novavax, Inc. at the time of the studyClinical TrialNCT04120194Clinical Protocols https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04120194 Funding StatementFunding was provided by Novavax, Inc.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:The trial was approved by the Advarra Institutional Review Board (Columbia, Maryland, USA).All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesThe datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available as analyses are ongoing and will be used for regulatory submissions for the vaccine described; but may become available in the future from the corresponding author on reasonable request