PLoS ONE (Jan 2018)

Optimizing the immunogenicity of HIV prime-boost DNA-MVA-rgp140/GLA vaccines in a phase II randomized factorial trial design.

  • Edna O Viegas,
  • Arne Kroidl,
  • Patricia J Munseri,
  • Marco Missanga,
  • Charlotta Nilsson,
  • Nelson Tembe,
  • Asli Bauer,
  • Agricola Joachim,
  • Sarah Joseph,
  • Philipp Mann,
  • Christof Geldmacher,
  • Sue Fleck,
  • Wolfgang Stöhr,
  • Gabriella Scarlatti,
  • Said Aboud,
  • Muhammad Bakari,
  • Leonard Maboko,
  • Michael Hoelscher,
  • Britta Wahren,
  • Merlin L Robb,
  • Jonathan Weber,
  • Sheena McCormack,
  • Gunnel Biberfeld,
  • Ilesh V Jani,
  • Eric Sandström,
  • Eligius Lyamuya,
  • TaMoVac study group

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206838
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 11
p. e0206838

Abstract

Read online

BackgroundWe evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of (i) an intradermal HIV-DNA regimen given with/without intradermal electroporation (EP) as prime and (ii) the impact of boosting with modified vaccinia virus Ankara (HIV-MVA) administered with or without subtype C CN54rgp140 envelope protein adjuvanted with Glucopyranosyl Lipid A (GLA-AF) in volunteers from Tanzania and Mozambique.MethodsHealthy HIV-uninfected adults (N = 191) were randomized twice; first to one of three HIV-DNA intradermal priming regimens by needle-free ZetaJet device at weeks 0, 4 and 12 (Group I: 2x0.1mL [3mg/mL], Group II: 2x0.1mL [3mg/mL] plus EP, Group III: 1x0.1mL [6mg/mL] plus EP). Second the same volunteers received 108 pfu HIV-MVA twice, alone or combined with CN54rgp140/GLA-AF, intramuscularly by syringe, 16 weeks apart. Additionally, 20 volunteers received saline placebo.ResultsVaccinations and electroporation did not raise safety concerns. After the last vaccination, the overall IFN-γ ELISpot response rate to either Gag or Env was 97%. Intradermal electroporation significantly increased ELISpot response rates to HIV-DNA-specific Gag (66% group I vs. 86% group II, p = 0.026), but not to the HIV-MVA vaccine-specific Gag or Env peptide pools nor the magnitude of responses. Co-administration of rgp140/GLA-AF with HIV-MVA did not impact the frequency of binding antibody responses against subtype B gp160, C gp140 or E gp120 antigens (95%, 99%, 79%, respectively), but significantly enhanced the magnitude against subtype B gp160 (2700 versus 300, pConclusionIntradermal electroporation increased DNA-induced Gag response rates but did not show an impact on Env-specific responses nor on the magnitude of responses. Co-administration of HIV-MVA with rgp140/GLA-AF significantly enhanced antibody responses.