English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Background  We compared safety and immunogenicity of intradermal (ID) vaccination with and without electroporation (EP) in a phase I randomized placebo-controlled trial of an HIV-DNA prime HIV-MVA boost vaccine in healthy Swedish volunteers.    Methods  HIV-DNA plasmids encoding HIV-1 genes gp160 subtypes A, B and C; Rev B; Gag A and B and RTmut B were given ID at weeks 0, 6 and 12 in a dose of 0.6 mg. Twenty-five volunteers received vaccine using a needle-free device (ZetaJet) with (n=16) or without (n=9) ID EP (Dermavax). Five volunteers were placebo recipients. Boosting with recombinant MVA-CMDR expressing HIV-1 Env, Gag, Pol of CRF01_AE (HIV-MVA) or placebo was performed at weeks 24 and 40. Nine of the vaccinees received a subtype C CN54 gp140 protein boost together with HIV-MVA.    Results  The ID/EP delivery was very well tolerated. After three HIV-DNA immunizations, no statistically significant difference was seen in the IFN-γ ELISpot response rate to Gag between HIV-DNA ID/EP recipients (5/15, 33%) and HIV-DNA ID recipients (1/7, 14%, p=0.6158). The first HIV-MVA or HIV-MVA+gp140 vaccination increased the IFN-γ ELISpot response rate to 18/19 (95%). CD4 +  and/or CD8 +  T cell responses to Gag or Env were demonstrable in 94% of vaccinees. A balanced CD4 +  and CD8 +  T cell response was noted, with 78% and 71% responders, respectively. IFN-γ and IL-2 dominated the CD4+ T cell response to Gag and Env. The CD8 +  response to Gag was broader with expression of IFN-γ, IL-2, MIP-1β and/or CD107. No differences were seen between DNA vaccine groups. Binding antibodies were induced after the second HIV-MVA+/-gp140 in 93% of vaccinees to subtype C Env, with the highest titers among EP/gp140 recipients.    Conclusion  Intradermal electroporation of HIV-DNA was well tolerated. Strong cell- and antibody-mediated immune responses were elicited by the HIV-DNA prime and HIV-MVA boosting regimen, with or without intradermal electroporation use.    Trial Registration  International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN)  60284968

plos one

HIV-DNA Given with or without Intradermal Electroporation Is Safe and Highly Immunogenic in Healthy Swedish HIV-1 DNA/MVA Vaccinees: A Phase I Randomized Trial