Delving into the Latest Updates on OXB-301 with Synapse

Overview

Basic Info

Drug Type

Therapeutic vaccine

Synonyms

5T4 cancer vaccine, Modified vaccinia Ankara 5T4, OBA 1 cancer vaccine

+ [7]

Target

5T4

Mechanism

5T4 modulators(Trophoblast glycoprotein modulators), T lymphocytes stimulants

Therapeutic Areas

NeoplasmsUrogenital Diseases

Active Indication

Renal Cell Carcinoma

Inactive Indication

Castration-Resistant Prostatic CancerColorectal Liver MetastasesFallopian Tube Carcinoma+ [8]

Originator Organization

Oxford Biomedica Plc

Active Organization

University of Cardiff

Wales Cancer Research CentreStartup

University College London

Inactive Organization

Oxford Biomedica Plc

Drug Highest PhasePhase 3

First Approval Date-

Regulation-

Login to view timeline

This international, multi-centre, double-blind vaccine study is a three-arm prospective 1:1:1 randomisation comparing each of two experimental combination vaccine regimens i.e. DNA/AIDSVAX (weeks 0,4,24,48) and DNA/CN54gp140 (weeks 0,4) + MVA/CN54gp140 (weeks 24,48) with placebo control. There will be a concurrent open-label 1:1 randomisation to compare daily TAF/FTC (week 0-26) to daily TDF/FTC (weeks 0-26) as pre-exposure prophylaxis.
The study aims to randomise up to 1668 eligible adults (18-40 years) through collaborating clinical research centres in 4 countries (Mozambique; South Africa; Tanzania; and Uganda). Each participant will be followed for a minimum of 74 weeks after enrolment.
The trial is designed to detect a reduction in HIV incidence that has public health relevance sufficient to justify implementation of the combination vaccine regimen. In light of the high level of effectiveness demonstrated in the PrEP trials (up to 86% reduction in HIV), this trial is powered to detect a protective vaccine efficacy of 70% at the final analysis.
The PrEP component will determine whether the effectiveness of TAF/FTC is unacceptably lower than the effectiveness of TDF/FTC.

Start Date15 Dec 2020

Sponsor / Collaborator

International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, Inc.

[+10]

NCT02390063

/ CompletedPhase 1IIT

A Randomized Phase I Study to Determine the Safety and Immunogenicity of ChAd-MVA Vaccination Compared to MVA Alone With and Without Low Dose Cyclophosphamide in Low and Intermediate Risk Localised Prostate Cancer

This is a clinical trial of a new treatment for prostate cancer that is a type of vaccine that could be a new way to treat cancer. A vaccine that could alert the immune system to the presence of cancer cells in the body may enable the immune system to target and kill those cells effectively. This vaccine is intended to work by making the immune system kill cells that have a special protein (called 5T4) that is present on the surface of cancer cells. The vaccine is made up of two recombinant viruses ("ChAdOx1" and "MVA") that have been designed to produce the 5T4 protein and have been modified so that they are weakened and cannot reproduce themselves within the body like normal viruses. Once injected into the body, these viruses make the 5T4 protein and help the body's immune system to learn to target this protein and destroy cancer cells.
This is a first-in-human study to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of ChAdOx1.5T4-MVA.5T4 vaccination regime. It is evaluated in neo-adjuvant setting in low and intermediate risk localised prostate cancer patients who have either decided to have their prostate removed or are stable on active surveillance.

Start Date01 Jun 2015

Sponsor / Collaborator

University of Oxford

NCT01556841

/ CompletedPhase 2IIT

A Phase II Study to Assess the Activity of TroVax® (MVA-5T4) Versus Placebo in Patients With Relapsed Asymptomatic Epithelial Ovarian, Fallopian Tube or Primary Peritoneal Cancer

The purpose of this trial is to assess the effectiveness of TroVax® compared to placebo in extending the time to progression in patients with asymptomatic relapsed platinum resistant ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer.The trial will also look at overall survival times and quality of life.

Start Date01 Nov 2013

Sponsor / Collaborator

University College London

[+2]

100 Clinical Results associated with OXB-301

Login to view more data

100 Translational Medicine associated with OXB-301

Login to view more data

100 Patents (Medical) associated with OXB-301

Login to view more data

94

Literatures (Medical) associated with OXB-301

01 Feb 2025·Anesthesia & Analgesia

Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia Versus Opioid-Free Anesthesia for the Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting after Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

Review

Author: Wei, Ke ; Zeng, Jie ; Zheng, Xiaozhuo ; Ao, Yichan ; Ma, Jingyue

BACKGROUND:Patients who undergo laparoscopic bariatric surgery (LBS) are susceptible to postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) or opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA) protocols have been proposed as solutions; however, differences between the 2 alternative opioid protocols for anesthesia maintenance in obese patients remain uncertain. A network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the impacts of OFA and OSA on PONV.METHODS:Systematic searches were conducted using Embase, PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OFA and OSA strategies. After screening according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, we used the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system to assess the credibility of the evidence. The main concern of this review was the difference between OFA and OSA in reducing PONV. The primary outcome was any PONV occurrence within 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain intensity, opioid consumption, opioid-related adverse events, and length of hospital stay.RESULTS:Fifteen RCTs involving 1310 patients were identified for a network meta-analysis from 1776 articles that compared OFA, OSA, and traditional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) strategies in LBS. Twelve RCTs (80%) with 922 participants (70%) were eligible for the occurrence of PONV. These included 199 (22%) patients who received OFA and 476 (52%) and 247 (27%) patients who received OSA and OBA, respectively. OFA was more effective at reducing PONV (relative risks [RR], 0.6, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.5–0.9, moderate-quality evidence) compared to OSA. No differences were observed in postoperative pain control or opioid consumption between the OFA and OSA strategies (very low-to high-quality evidence). Notably, OFA is associated with a higher risk of bradycardia than OSA (RR, 2.6, 95% CI, 1.2–5.9, moderate-quality evidence).CONCLUSIONS:OFA is more effective than OSA in reducing the occurrence of PONV during the early postoperative period of LBS, although it may associate with an increased risk of bradycardia. Patients who received either opioid-alternative strategy demonstrated similar effects in reducing postoperative opioid consumption and alleviating pain intensity.

01 Jan 2025·Anaesthesia Critical Care & Pain Medicine

Opioid-free anaesthesia and postoperative quality of recovery: a systematic review and meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

Review

Author: Liu, Yijun ; Ma, Wei ; Li, Qian ; Zuo, Yunxia

BACKGROUNDThere is still debate over whether opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) can improve the patient-reported quality of recovery (QoR).METHODSA search was conducted across Pubmed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE until June 2024 for randomized controlled trials comparing the impact of OFA and opioid-based anaesthesia (OBA) on QoR in adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia. The primary outcome was the quality of recovery measured with the QoR scale. The secondary outcomes were the five dimensions of the QoR scale.RESULTSThe analysis included 15 studies, and showed that compared with OBA, OFA improved the global QoR score at postoperative 24 h (SMD 0.87; 95% CI, 0.48-1.27; I²: 92%; low-level evidence). Among them, 10 studies revealed a greater QoR-40 score at postoperative 24 h in the OFA than in the OBA (MD 6.59; 95% CI, 2.84-10.34; I²: 93%; moderate-level evidence), which exceeded the minimal clinically important difference of 6.3. Conversely, the synthetic data of 4 studies did not reveal an improvement in the global QoR-15 score at postoperative 24 h (MD 9.94; 95% CI, -0.15 to 12.35; I²: 97%; low-level evidence). Regarding different domains of scale, OFA had positive effects on physical comfort (SMD 0.75; 95% CI, 0.25-1.25; I²: 93%; moderate-level evidence) and pain (SMD 0.59; 95% CI, 0.15-1.03; I²: 91%; moderate-level evidence).CONCLUSIONSThe meta-analysis indicate OFA can improve the quality of recovery at postoperative 24 h, particularly in terms of enhancing physical comfort and reducing pain. However, due to significant heterogeneity and moderate-to-low level of evidence, the external validity of OFA for improving postoperative recovery remains to be further validated.REGISTRATIONThe protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database on December 07, 2023 (CRD42023486235).

10 Aug 2024·BMC surgery

Opioid-free anesthesia with esketamine-dexmedetomidine versus opioid-based anesthesia with propofol-remifentanil in shoulder arthroscopy: a randomized controlled trial.

Article

Author: Yan, Cong ; Qian, Bin ; Yang, Nan ; Qian, Weisheng ; Zhang, Geqing ; Liu, Xiang ; Liu, Yi ; Xue, Zhouya

BACKGROUNDOFA (Opioid-free anesthesia) has the potential to reduce the occurrence of opioid-related adverse events and enhance postoperative recovery. Our research aimed to investigate whether OFA, combining esketamine and dexmedetomidine, could serve as an alternative protocol to traditional OBA (opioid-based anesthesia) in shoulder arthroscopy, particularly in terms of reducing PONV (postoperative nausea and vomiting).METHODSA total of 60 patients treated with shoulder arthroscopy from September 2021 to September 2022 were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to the OBA group (n = 30) and OFA group (n = 30), receiving propofol-remifentanil TIVA (total intravenous anesthesia) and esketamine-dexmedetomidine intravenous anesthesia, respectively. Both groups received ultrasound-guided ISBPB(interscalene brachial plexus block)for postoperative analgesia.RESULTSThe incidence of PONV on the first postoperative day in the ward (13.3% vs. 40%, P < 0.05) was significantly lower in the OFA group than in the OBA group. Moreover, the severity of PONV was less severe in the OFA group than in the OBA group in PACU (post-anesthesia care unit) (0 [0, 0] vs. 0 [0, 3], P<0.05 ) and in the ward 24 h postoperatively ( 0 [0, 0] vs. 0 [0, 2.25], P<0.05). Additionally, the OFA group experienced a significantly shorter length of stay in the PACU compared to the OBA group (39.4 ± 6.76 min vs. 48.7 ± 7.90 min, P < 0.001).CONCLUSIONSCompared to the OBA with propofol-remifentanil, the OFA with esketamine- dexmedetomidine proved to be feasible for shoulder arthroscopy, resulting in a reduced incidence of PONV and a shorter duration of stay in the PACU.TRIAL REGISTRATIONThe Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No: ChiCTR2100047355), 12/06/2021.

100 Deals associated with OXB-301

Login to view more data

R&D Status

10 top R&D records.

Login

to view more data

Indication	Highest Phase	Country/Location	Organization	Date
Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 3	-	University College London	-
Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 3	-	Wales Cancer Research CentreStartup	-
Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 3	-	University of Cardiff	-
Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 2	PL	Oxford Biomedica Plc	01 Sep 2006
Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 2	US	Oxford Biomedica Plc	01 Sep 2006
Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 2	UA	Oxford Biomedica Plc	01 Sep 2006
Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 2	FR	Oxford Biomedica Plc	01 Sep 2006
Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 2	RO	Oxford Biomedica Plc	01 Sep 2006
Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 2	IL	Oxford Biomedica Plc	01 Sep 2006
Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma	Phase 2	ES	Oxford Biomedica Plc	01 Sep 2006

Login to view more data

Clinical Result

Indication

Phase

Evaluation

View All Results

Study	Phase	Population	Analyzed Enrollment	Group	Results	Evaluation	Publication Date


NCT01556841 (TRIOC, Pubmed) Manual	Phase 2	Recurrent ovarian cancer	94	MVA-5T4 vaccine	(daliqkcgyl) = gbdhthnayw nnisdhedga (hxkgqpbllb ) View more	Negative	17 May 2024
NCT01556841 (TRIOC, Pubmed) Manual	Phase 2	Recurrent ovarian cancer	94	modified vaccinia Ankara-5T4 vaccine (Placebo)	(daliqkcgyl) = hlltstzohz nnisdhedga (hxkgqpbllb ) View more	Negative	17 May 2024
EUCTR2011-001836-44-GB (TRIOC-A, ESMO2020)	Phase 2	Recurrent ovarian cancer	94	MVA-5T4 vaccine	rjxmssmzvk(youbpjubun) = mrqegwzzjg nlrqwphqji (ntuguykkov ) View more	Negative	17 Sep 2020
EUCTR2011-001836-44-GB (TRIOC-A, ESMO2020)	Phase 2	Recurrent ovarian cancer	94	Placebo	rjxmssmzvk(youbpjubun) = lampmftnon nlrqwphqji (ntuguykkov ) View more	Negative	17 Sep 2020
ASCO2008	Phase 2	Kidney Neoplasms First line	11	TroVax plus IFN-α	(xkkkgsmtkx) = chxdgemlpp iovpecswpg (nskynmyutz )	-	20 May 2008
ASCO2008	Phase 2	Kidney Neoplasms	25	TroVax[T] + low dose interleukin-2 (IL-2)	(ksmdgdwthv) = izbnewscwk nsntxrohad (lfibsjqewz ) View more	-	20 May 2008