Quality attributes of CTVad1, a nanoemulsified adjuvant for phase I clinical trial of SpiN COVID-19 vaccine

Papers of special note have been highlighted as: • of interest; •• of considerable interest

References

• 1. World Health Organization. ‘Weekly epidemiological COVID-19 April 2023’ (2023). https://covid19.who.int/
  Google Scholar
• 2. Cohen C, Kleynhans J, Von Gottberg A et al. SARS-COV-2 incidence, transmission, and reinfection in a rural and an urban setting: results of the PHIRST-C cohort study, South Africa, 2020-21. Lancet 22(6), 821–834 (2022).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 3. Steel K, Donnarumma H. Coronavirus (COVID-19) infection survey: UK: 26 February 2021 (2021). www.ons.gov.uk/
  Google Scholar
• 4. Kong S. Real-time dashboard. Coronavirus disease 2019 (2019). https://covid19.sph.hku.hk/
  Google Scholar
• 5. Tregoning JS, Flight KE, Higham SL et al. Progress of the COVID-19 vaccine effort: viruses, vaccines and variants versus efficacy, effectiveness and escape. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 21(10), 626–636 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 6. Watson OJ, Barnsley G, Toor J et al. Global impact of the first year of COVID-19 vaccination: a mathematical modelling study. Lancet Infect. Dis. 22(9), 1293–1302 (2022).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 7. Azevedo PO, Hojo-Souza NS, Faustino LP et al. Differential requirement of neutralizing antibodies and T cells on protective immunity to SARS-COV-2 variants of concern. NPJ Vaccines 8(1), 1–17 (2023).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 8. Gazzinelli RT, Teixeira SMR, Fernandes APSM et al. Patent BR 10 2021 009573 3. Composição imunogênica contra SARS-COV2, vetores vacinais, proteína quimérica, processo de produção e usos (2021). www.somos.ufmg.br/departamento/departamento-de-bioquimica-e-imunologia
  Google Scholar
• 9. Jia Z, Gong W. Will mutations in the spike protein of SARS-COV-2 lead to the failure of covid-19 vaccines? J. Korean Med. Sci. 36(18), 1–11 (2021).
  Google Scholar
• 10. Li X, Xiong M, Deng Q et al. The utility of SARS-COV-2 nucleocapsid protein in laboratory diagnosis. J. Clin. Lab. Anal. 36(7), 24534–24546 (2022).
  Google Scholar
• 11. Castro JT, Azevedo P, Fumagalli MJ et al. Promotion of neutralizing antibody-independent immunity to wild-type and SARS-COV-2 variants of concern using an RBD-nucleocapsid fusion protein. Nat. Commun. 13(1), 1–16 (2022). •• Details the immunogenic potential of recombinant SpiN protein tested poly-ICLC adjuvant.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 12. Batista-Duharte A, Lindblad EB, Oviedo-Orta E. Progress in understanding adjuvant immunotoxicity mechanisms. Toxicol. Lett. 203(2), 97–105 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 13. Chatzikleanthous D, O'Hagan DT, Adamo R. Lipid-based nanoparticles for delivery of vaccine adjuvants and antigens: toward multicomponent vaccines. Mol. Pharm. 18(8), 2867–2888 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 14. Huang CH, Huang CY, Ho HM et al. Nanoemulsion adjuvantation strategy of tumor-associated antigen therapy rephrases mucosal and immunotherapeutic signatures following intranasal vaccination. J. Immunother. Cancer 8(2), 1022–1033 (2020).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 15. Apostólico JDS, Lunardelli VAS, Coirada FC et al. Adjuvants: classification, modus operandi, and licensing. J. Immunol. Res 2016, 1–16 (2016).
  Google Scholar
• 16. Marriott M, Post B, Chablani L. A comparison of cancer vaccine adjuvants in clinical trials. Cancer Treat. Res. Commun. 34, 100667–100679 (2023).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 17. Givord C, Welsby I, Detienne S et al. Activation of the endoplasmic reticulum stress sensor IRE1A by the vaccine adjuvant AS03 contributes to its immunostimulatory properties. NPJ Vaccines 3(1), 1–12 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 18. Vesikari T, Kirstein J, Devota Go G et al. Efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety evaluation of an MF59-adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza virus vaccine compared with non-adjuvanted influenza vaccine in children: a multicentre, randomised controlled, observer-blinded, phase 3 trial. Lancet Respir. Med. 6(5), 345–356 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 19. Pifferi C, Fuentes R, Fernández-Tejada A. Natural and synthetic carbohydrate-based vaccine adjuvants and their mechanisms of action. Nat. Rev. Chem. 5(3), 197–216 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 20. Wang Z, Li S, Shan P et al. Improved aluminum adjuvants eliciting stronger immune response when mixed with hepatitis b virus surface antigens. ACS Omega 7(38), 34528–34537 (2022).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 21. O'Hagan DT, Ott GS, De Gregorio E et al. The mechanism of action of MF59 – an innately attractive adjuvant formulation. Vaccine 30(29), 4341–4348 (2012).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 22. Ko E, Kang S. Immunology and efficacy of MF59-adjuvanted vaccines. Human Vaccines Immunother. 14(12), 3401–3045 (2018).
  Google Scholar
• 23. Nguyen-Contant P, Sangster MY, Topham DJ. Squalene-based influenza vaccine adjuvants and their impact on the hemagglutinin-specific B cell response. Pathogens 10(3), 355–368 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 24. Nakaya HI, Clutterbuck E, Kazmin D et al. Systems biology of immunity to MF59-adjuvanted versus nonadjuvanted trivalent seasonal influenza vaccines in early childhood. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113(7), 1853–1858 (2016).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 25. Cruz-Valdez A, Valdez-Zapata G, Patel SS et al. MF59-adjuvanted influenza vaccine (Fluad^®) elicits higher immune responses than a non-adjuvanted influenza vaccine (Fluzone^®): a randomized, multicenter, phase III pediatric trial in Mexico. Hum Vaccin. Immunother. 14(2), 386–395 (2018).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 26. Keitel W, Groth N, Lattanzi M et al. Dose ranging of adjuvant and antigen in a cell culture H5N1 influenza vaccine: safety and immunogenicity of a phase 1/2 clinical trial. Vaccine 28(3), 840–848 (2010).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 27. Shah RR, O'Hagan DT, Amiji MM, Brito LA. The impact of size on particulate vaccine adjuvants. Nanomedicine (Lond.) 9(17), 2671–2681 (2014).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 28. O'Hagan D, Van Nest G. Ott GS et al. Use of microparticles combined with submicron oil-in-water emulsions. Patent WO1999030737A1 1–49 (2002).
  Google Scholar
• 29. Stelzner JJ, Behrens M, Behrens SE et al. Squalene containing solid lipid nanoparticles, a promising adjuvant system for yeast vaccines. Vaccine 36(17), 2314–2320 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 30. InvivoGen. AddaVax™ Squalene-based oil-in-water adjuvant. www.invivogen.com/addavax
  Google Scholar
• 31. Amaral MP, de Apostolico JS, Tomita N et al. Homologous prime-boost with zika virus envelope protein and poly (i:c) induces robust specific humoral and cellular immune responses. Vaccine 38(20), 3653–3664 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 32. Rosendahl Huber SK, Hendriks M, Jacobi RHJ et al. Immunogenicity of influenza vaccines: evidence for differential effect of secondary vaccination on humoral and cellular immunity. Front. Immunol. 9, 3103–3115 (2018). •• In this clinical trial it is demonstrated that MF59 can stimulate cellular and humoral responses.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 33. Smith CL, Bednarchik B, Aung H et al. Humoral and cellular immunity induced by adjuvanted and standard trivalent influenza vaccine in older nursing home residents. J. Infect. Dis. Mar 23, jiad071 (2023).
  Google Scholar
• 34. Pavlick A, Blazquez AB, Meseck M et al. Combined vaccination with NY-ESO-1 protein, poly-ICLC, and Montanide improves humoral and cellular immune responses in high-risk melanoma patients. Cancer Immunol. Res. 8(1), 70–80 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 35. Choque-Guevara R, Poma-Acevedo A, Montesinos-Millán R et al. Squalene in oil-based adjuvant improves the immunogenicity of SARS-CoV-2 RBD and confirms safety in animal models. PLOS ONE 17(8), 1–19 (2022).
  Google Scholar
• 36. Wang R, Sun C, Ma J et al. A bivalent COVID-19 vaccine based on alpha and beta variants elicits potent and broad immune responses in mice against SARS-COV-2 variants. Vaccines (Basel) 10(5), 702–718 (2022).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 37. Wang R, Huang H, Yu C et al. A spike-trimer protein-based tetravalent COVID-19 vaccine elicits enhanced breadth of neutralization against SARS-CoV-2 Omicron subvariants and other variants. Sci. China Life Sci. 66 (8), 1–13 (2023).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 38. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. The european medicines agency. Presented at: Guideline on adjuvants in vaccines for human use. (2005). www.ema.europa.eu/
  Google Scholar
• 39. World Health Organization. Guidelines on the non-clinical evaluation of vaccine adjuvants and adjuvanted vaccines, Annex 2, TRS No 987. (2014). www.who.int/publications/
  Google Scholar
• 40. Dinadayala P, Gleizal G, Guinamand S et al. Characterization of antigen adjuvant interactions in polyacrylate adjuvanted vaccines. Biochem. Biophys. Rep. 33, 101405–101412 (2023).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 41. Sanyal G, Särnefält A, Kumar A. Perspective considerations for bioanalytical characterization and batch release of COVID-19 vaccines. NPJ Vaccines 6, 53–62 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 42. O'Hagan DT, Ott GS, Van Nest G et al. The history of MF59^® adjuvant: a phoenix that arose from the ashes. Expert Rev. Vaccines 12(1), 13–30 (2013).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 43. Ott G, Barchfeld GL, Van Nest G. Enhancement of humoral response against human influenza vaccine with the simple submicron oil/water emulsion adjuvant MF59. Vaccine 13(16), 1557–1562 (1995).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 44. Elder DTeasdale ANims RW (Eds). ICH Q9 quality risk management. In: ICH Quality Guidelines: An Implementation Guide (1st Edition). 579–610 John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, (NJ, USA) (2018).
  Google Scholar
• 45. Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use. Guideline Q9 (R1) on quality risk management. Step 5. In: International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). Guideline Q9 (R1) on quality risk management. Step 5, revision 1 - Technical requirements for registration of pharmaceutical for human use. 18–19 (2023). •• This ICH guide provides essential guidelines for risk analysis during the development of a drug for human use.
  Google Scholar
• 46. CMC-Vaccine Working Group. A-Vax: applying quality by design to vaccines (2012). http://qbdworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/a-vax-applying-qbd-to-vaccines.pdf
  Google Scholar
• 47. de Van Berg D, Kis Z, Behmer CF et al. Quality by design modelling to support rapid RNA vaccine production against emerging infectious diseases. NPJ Vaccines 65, 1–10 (2021).
  Google Scholar
• 48. Fahmy R, Kona R, Dandu R et al. Quality by design I: application of failure mode effect analysis (FMEA) and Plackett-Burman design of experiments in the identification of “main factors” in the formulation and process design space for roller-compacted ciprofloxacin hydrochloride immediate-release tablets. AAPS PharmSciTech 13(4), 1243–1254 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 49. Peng J, Dong WJ, Li L et al. Effect of high-pressure homogenization preparation on mean globule size and large-diameter tail of oil-in-water injectable emulsions. J. Food Drug. Anal. 23(4), 828–835 (2015). • Details the impact of process parameters in a high-pressure homogenizer on the globule size of an emulsion.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 50. Kruszewski B, Zawada K, Karpiński P. Impact of high-pressure homogenization parameters on physicochemical characteristics, bioactive compounds content, and antioxidant capacity of blackcurrant juice. Molecules 26(6), 1802–1818 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 51. Agência Nacional de Vigilância Sanitária. Farmacopeia Brasileira (Volume 1), (6th Edition) Chapters 5.1.2; 5.2.19; 5.2.7; 5.2.28; 5.2.22; 5.5.3.2.1; 5.5.2.2. Brasília, Brazil (2019). www.gov.br/anvisa/
  Google Scholar
• 52. The United States Pharmacopeial Convention. USP 43: The United States pharmacopeia (Volume 1). USP 43-NF 38 - Chapters 1085, 785, 432, 729, 1430.3. Rockville, MD, USA (2022).
  Google Scholar
• 53. Wei Y, Xiong J, Larson NR et al. Effect of 2 emulsion-based adjuvants on the structure and thermal stability of Staphylococcus aureus alpha-toxin. J. Pharm. Sci. 107(9), 2325–2334 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 54. Singh A, Raju R, Mrad M et al. The reciprocal EC50 value as a convenient measure of the potency of a compound in bioactivity-guided purification of natural products. Fitoterapia 143, 104598–110464 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 55. Biological activity of cytokines: specific activity (units/mg) vs. international units (iu) | stemcell technologies. www.stemcell.com/biological-activity-of-cytokines-specific-activity-units-mg-vs-international-units.html
  Google Scholar
• 56. Wajnberg A, Amanat F, Firpo A et al. Robust neutralizing antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 infection persist for months. Science 370(6521), 1227–1230 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 57. Hamed SF, Abo-Elwafa GA. Preparation of novel nanoemulsions from omega-3 rich oil. Grasas y Aceites 71(2), e350 (2020).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 58. Abdel-Aty AAR, Aziz YSA, Ahmed RMG et al. High performance isotropic polyethersulfone membranes for heavy oil-in-water emulsion separation. Sep. Purif. Technol. 253, 117467 (2020).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 59. Wang W, Lin J, Cheng J et al. Dual super-amphiphilic modified cellulose acetate nanofiber membranes with highly efficient oil/water separation and excellent antifouling properties. J. Hazard. Mater. 385, 121582 (2020).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 60. Chinyoka T. Comparative response of Newtonian and non-Newtonian fluids subjected to exothermic reactions in shear flow. Int. J. Appl. Comput. Math. 7(3), 1–19 (2021).
  Google Scholar
• 61. Wang H, He Z, Li J et al. Early plasma osmolality levels and clinical outcomes in children admitted to the pediatric intensive care unit: a single-center cohort study. Front. Pediatr. 9, 745204 (2021).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 62. LTDA M. Zetasizer Nano user manual (English) | Malvern Panalytical (2013). www.malvernpanalytical.com/en/learn/knowledge-center/user-manuals/man0485en
  Google Scholar
• 63. Lai RPJ, Seaman MS, Tonks P et al. Mixed adjuvant formulations reveal a new combination that elicit antibody response comparable to Freund's adjuvants. PLOS ONE 7(4), e35083 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 64. HogenEsch H, O'Hagan DT, Fox CB. Optimizing the utilization of aluminum adjuvants in vaccines: you might just get what you want. NPJ Vaccines 3(1), 1–11 (2018).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 65. O'Donnell JS, Isaacs A, Jakob V et al. Characterization and comparison of novel adjuvants for a prefusion clamped MERS vaccine. Front. Immunol. 13, 976968 (2022).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 66. Pollard AJ, Bijker EM. A guide to vaccinology: from basic principles to new developments. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 21(2), 83–100 (2020).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 67. Azeem A, Rizwan M, Ahmad FJ et al. Nanoemulsion components screening and selection: a technical note. AAPS PharmSciTech 10(1), 69–76 (2009).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 68. Azmi NAN, Elgharbawy AAM, Motlagh SR et al. Nanoemulsions: factory for food, pharmaceutical and cosmetics. Processes 7(9), 617–651 (2019).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 69. Manuel Montes de Oca-A J, Jorge Candal R, Lidia Herrera M et al. Nanoemulsions: stability and physical properties. Curr. Opin. Food Sci. 16, 1–6 (2017).
  Google Scholar
• 70. Kong M, Park HJ. Stability investigation of hyaluronic acid based nanoemulsion and its potential as transdermal carrier. Carbohydr. Polym. 83(3), 1303–1310 (2011).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 71. Herneisey M, Liu L, Lambert E et al. Development of theranostic perfluorocarbon nanoemulsions as a model non-opioid pain nanomedicine using a quality by design (QbD) approach. AAPS PharmSciTech 20(2), 65–91 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 72. Mirković D, Ibrić S, Balanč B et al. Evaluation of the impact of critical quality attributes and critical process parameters on quality and stability of parenteral nutrition nanoemulsions. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 39, 341–347 (2017).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 73. Zhao L, Zhu Z, Ma L et al. O/W nanoemulsion as an adjuvant for an inactivated H₃N₂ influenza vaccine: based on particle properties and mode of carrying. Int. J. Nanomed. 15, 2071–2083 (2020). • Analyzes how globule size, polydispersion index and oil phase composition can impact the performance of nanoemulsified adjuvants.
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 74. Calabro S, Tritto E, Pezzotti A et al. The adjuvant effect of MF59 is due to the oil-in-water emulsion formulation, none of the individual components induce a comparable adjuvant effect. Vaccine 31(33), 3363–3369 (2013).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 75. Rele S. COVID-19 vaccine development during pandemic: gap analysis, opportunities, and impact on future emerging infectious disease development strategies. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 17(4), 1122–1127 (2021).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 76. Danaei M, Dehghankhold M, Ataei S et al. Impact of particle size and polydispersity index on the clinical applications of lipidic nanocarrier systems. Pharmaceutics 10(2), 57–74 (2018).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 77. Usach I, Martinez R, Festini T et al. Subcutaneous injection of drugs: literature review of factors influencing pain sensation at the injection site. Adv. Ther. 36(11), 2986–2996 (2019).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 78. Yang SC, Benita S. Enhanced absorption and drug targeting by positively charged submicron emulsions. Drug Dev. Res. 50(3–4), 476–486 (2000).
  CASGoogle Scholar
• 79. Zhang J, Miao J, Han X et al. Development of a novel oil-in-water emulsion and evaluation of its potential adjuvant function in a swine influenza vaccine in mice. BMC Vet. Res. 14(1), 415–426 (2018).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 80. Aghebati T, Mohammadpour AH, Afshar M et al. A novel atheroprotective role of MF59-like adjuvant when co-administered with CETP vaccine in rabbit model of atherosclerosis. Iran J. Basic Med. Sci. 19(12), 1345–1352 (2016).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 81. International Council for Harmonisation (ICH). Topic Q6A specifications: test procedures and acceptance criteria for new drug substances and new drug products: chemical substances. Step 5 (2006). www.ema.europa.eu/
  Google Scholar
• 82. Della Cioppa G, Nicolay U, Lindert K et al. Superior immunogenicity of seasonal influenza vaccines containing full dose of MF59^® adjuvant. Hum. Vaccin. Immunother. 8(2), 216–227 (2012). •• Clinical study with Fluad® comparing different doses of the MF59® adjuvant.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 83. Food and Drug Administration, FDA. Guidance for industry content and format of investigational new drug applications (INDs) for phase 1 studies of drugs, including well-characterized, therapeutic, biotechnology-derived products (1995). www.gmp-compliance.org/
  Google Scholar
• 84. Nony P, Girard P, Chabaud S et al. Impact of osmolality on burning sensations during and immediately after intramuscular injection of 0.5 ml of vaccine suspensions in healthy adults. Vaccine 19(27), 3645–3651 (2001).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 85. Zhai J, Hoffmann SV, Day L et al. Conformational changes of α-lactalbumin adsorbed at oil-water interfaces: interplay between protein structure and emulsion stability. Langmuir 28(5), 2357–2367 (2012).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 86. Zhai J, Wooster TJ, Hoffmann SV et al. Structural rearrangement of β-lactoglobulin at different oil-water interfaces and its effect on emulsion stability. Langmuir 27(15), 9227–9236 (2011).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 87. Fox CB, Kramer RM, LB V et al. Working together: interactions between vaccine antigens and adjuvants. Ther. Adv. Vaccines 1(1), 7–20 (2013). • In this review, the authors detail interaction studies of different antigens with emulsified adjuvants.
  MedlineGoogle Scholar
• 88. Ott G, Barchfeld GL, Chernoff D et al. MF59. Design and evaluation of a safe and potent adjuvant for human vaccines. Pharm. Biotechnol. 6, 277–296 (1995).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 89. Huang M, Wang W. Factors affecting alum-protein interactions. Int. J. Pharm. 466(1-2), 139–146 (2014).
  Medline CASGoogle Scholar
• 90. Romero Méndez IZ, Shi Y, HogenEsch H et al. Potentiation of the immune response to non-adsorbed antigens by aluminum-containing adjuvants. Vaccine 25(5), 825–833 (2007).
  MedlineGoogle Scholar