Sanofi Healthcare India Pvt Ltd.

Antibody persistence of a whole-cell pertussis-containing hexavalent vaccine (DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T) and its co- or sequential administration with measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine were evaluated.

Phase III, open-label, randomized, multicenter study in India. Healthy toddlers 12–24 months of age who had received DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T or separate DTwP-HB-PRP~T+IPV primary vaccination at 6–8, 10–12 and 14–16 weeks of age received a DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T booster concomitantly with MMR (N = 336) or 28 days before MMR (N = 340). Participants had received a first dose of measles vaccine. Immunogenicity assessment used validated assays and safety was by parental reports. All analyses were descriptive.

All participants had prebooster anti-T ≥0.01 IU/mL and anti-polio 1 and 3 ≥8 1/dil, and ≥96.5% had anti-D ≥0.01 IU/mL, anti-HBs ≥10 mIU/mL, anti-polio 2 ≥8 1/dil and anti-PRP ≥0.15 µg/mL; for pertussis, antibody persistence was similar in each group. Postbooster immunogenicity for DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T was similar for each antigen in each group: ≥99.5% of participants had anti-D ≥0.01 IU/mL, anti-T ≥0.01 IU/mL, anti-polio 1, 2 and 3 >8 1/dil, anti-HBs ≥10 mIU/mL and anti-PRP ≥1 µg/mL; for pertussis, vaccine response was similar in each group [72.0%–75.9% (anti-PT), 80.8%–81.4% (anti-FIM), 77.6%–79.5% (anti-PRN), 78.2%–80.8% (anti-FHA)]. There was no difference in MMR immunogenicity between groups, and no difference in DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T booster immunogenicity based on the primary series. There were no safety concerns.

DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T antibody persistence was similar to licensed comparators. Booster immunogenicity was robust after DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T with or without MMR, and MMR immunogenicity was not affected by coadministration with DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T.

CTRI/2020/04/024843.

This study investigated the immunogenicity and safety of a fully liquid, hexavalent, diphtheria (D)-tetanus (T)-whole-cell pertussis (wP)-inactivated poliovirus (IPV)-hepatitis B (HB)-Haemophilus influenzae b (PRP-T) vaccine compared to licensed DTwP-HB-PRP~T, IPV, and bivalent oral poliovirus (bOPV) vaccines following co-administration with other pediatric vaccines [pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV13) and rotavirus vaccine].

Phase III, randomized, open-label study in Thailand. Healthy infants received DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T at 2, 4 and 6 months of age (N = 228), or DTwP-HB-PRP~T and bOPV (2, 4 and 6 months of age) and IPV (4 months of age) (N = 231). All participants received PCV13 (2, 4 and 6 months of age) and rotavirus vaccine (2 and 4 months of age). Immunogenicity for all antigens was assessed using validated assays, and noninferiority post-third dose was evaluated for anti-D, anti-T, anti-pertussis [anti-pertussis toxin (anti-PT) and anti-fimbriae 2/3 (anti-FIM)], anti-polio 1, 2, 3, anti-HB, and anti-PRP~T. Safety was assessed using parental reports.

Noninferiority was demonstrated for each antigen, and overall noninferiority of DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T versus DTwP-HB-PRP~T+bOPV+IPV was concluded. Similarity in each group was observed for the GMC ratio for antirotavirus antibodies (20.9 and 17.3, respectively) and anti-PCV13 antibodies (range: 8.46–32.6 and 7.53–33.1, respectively). Two serious adverse events were related to DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T (febrile convulsion and acute febrile illness) and 1 was related to DTwP-HB-PRP~T+bOPV+IPV (febrile seizure), but overall there were no safety concerns with similar rates of participants experiencing solicited (99.1% and 98.3%) and unsolicited (19.3% and 19.5%) adverse events in each group.

This study confirmed the suitability of DTwP-IPV-HB-PRP~T primary series vaccination in combination with rotavirus and PCV13 vaccines.

Nanoemulsion preparations of cholecalciferol available in the market claim to have better bioavailability than the conventional fat-soluble cholecalciferol. However, limited data are available in humans for such preparations. We, therefore, compared the relative bioavailability of two formulations of 60,000 IU cholecalciferol (nanoemulsion oral solution, water-miscible vitamin D3 [test] vs soft gelatin capsules [reference]) in healthy adult participants.

In this randomized, open-label, two sequence, single-dose, two-way crossover study (CTRI/2018/05/013839), Indian participants aged 18-45 years received single dose of nanoemulsion and capsule formulations, under fasting conditions. Blood samples collected over 120 h were assessed to determine cholecalciferol concentrations. Pharmacokinetic parameters (area under the concentration-time curve up to 120 h [AUC_0-120h], maximum observed drug concentration [C_max], time to reach maximum drug concentration [T_max], terminal half-life [T_½el], and terminal elimination rate constant [K_el]) were estimated using baseline corrected data and analyzed using analysis of variance.

Among the 24 eligible participants, the relative bioavailability of nanoemulsion was significantly higher than the capsules by 36% (p = 0.0001) based on AUC_0-120h. Similarly, C_max of the nanoemulsion was significantly higher by 43% (p = 0.0001) than that of the capsules. The intra-participant variability for AUC_0-120h and C_max were 23.22% and 26.51%, respectively. The T_max, T_½el, and K_el were comparable for both the formulations. No adverse effects were noted with either of the two formulations.

Nanoemulsion oral solution of cholecalciferol showed a greater bioavailability compared with soft gelatin capsules, under fasting conditions, in healthy human participants.