Background Influenza A results in significant morbidity and mortality. VIR-2482, an engineered human monoclonal antibody with extended half-life, targets a highly conserved epitope on the stem region of influenza A hemagglutinin and may protect against seasonal and pandemic influenza.Methods This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study examined the safety and efficacy of VIR-2482 for seasonal influenza A illness prevention in unvaccinated healthy adults. Participants (N = 2977) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive VIR-2482 450 mg, VIR-2482 1200 mg, or placebo via intramuscular injection. Primary and secondary efficacy endpoints were the proportions of participants with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza A infection and either protocol-defined influenza-like illness (ILI) and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-defined ILI or World Health Organization-defined ILI, respectively.Results VIR-2482 450 mg and 1200 mg prophylaxis did not reduce the risk of protocol-defined ILI with reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction-confirmed influenza A versus placebo (relative risk reduction, 3.8% [95% confidence interval (CI), -67.3 to 44.6] and 15.9% [95% CI, -49.3 to 52.3], respectively). At the 1200-mg dose, the relative risk reductions in influenza A illness were 57.2% (95% CI: -2.5 to 82.2) using Centers for Disease Control and Prevention ILI and 44.1% (95% CI: -50.5 to 79.3) using World Health Organization ILI definitions, respectively. Serum VIR-2482 levels were similar regardless of influenza status; variants with reduced VIR-2482 susceptibility were not detected. Local injection site reactions were mild and similar across groups.Conclusions VIR-2482 1200 mg intramuscular was well tolerated but did not significantly prevent protocol-defined ILI. Secondary endpoint analyses suggest this dose may have reduced influenza A illness. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05567783.Conclusions VIR-2482 1200 mg intramuscular was well tolerated but did not significantly prevent protocol-defined ILI. Secondary endpoint analyses suggest this dose may have reduced influenza A illness. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05567783. Prophylactic administration of 1200 mg of VIR-2482, an engineered human monoclonal antibody targeting a highly conserved epitope on the stem region of influenza A hemagglutinin, did not significantly reduce risk of influenza-like illness from influenza A virus in healthy adults. Graphical Abstract This graphical abstract is also available at Tidbit: https://tidbitapp.io/tidbits/a-randomized-placebo-controlled-trial-to-evaluate-the-safety-and-efficacy-of-vir-2482-in-healthy-adults-for-prevention-of-influenza-a-illness-peninsula-5591c84c-e394-4788-af48-4b317660ef10?utm_campaign=tidbitlinkshare&utm_source=ITP

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of VIR-2482 in healthy adult subjects. A phase 1, first-in-human, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-escalation study was conducted. One hundred participants were allocated to four cohorts (60 mg, 300 mg, 1,200 mg, and 1,800 mg). In each cohort, participants were randomized in a 4:1 ratio (active:placebo) to receive either VIR-2482 or volume-matched placebo by gluteal intramuscular injection. Participants remained at the investigative site under observation for 48 h, and adverse events (AEs) were collected for 56 days. PK and immunogenicity were measured up to 52 weeks post-dose. VIR-2482 was well tolerated at all doses studied. The overall incidence of AEs was comparable between VIR-2482 (68.8%) and placebo (85.0%). Nineteen VIR-2482 (23.8%) and six placebo (30.0%) recipients had Grade 1 or 2 AEs that were considered to be related to the study intervention. There were no treatment-related serious AEs. Injection-site reactions (ISRs) were reported in six (7.5%) VIR-2482 recipients, while no such reactions were reported among the placebo recipients. All ISRs were Grade 1, and there was no relationship with the dose. Median VIR-2482 serum elimination half-life ranged from 56.7 to 70.6 days across cohorts. The serum area under the curve and Cmax were dose-proportional. Nasopharyngeal VIR-2482 concentrations were approximately 2%-5% of serum levels and were less than dose-proportional. The incidence of immunogenicity across all cohorts was 1.3%. Overall, the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic profile of VIR-2482 at doses up to 1,800 mg supported its further investigation as a long-acting antibody for the prevention of influenza A illness. This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT04033406.

Background We report on the safety and immunogenicity of V591, a measles vector-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate. Methods In this multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1/2 trial, healthy adults with no history of COVID-19 disease were assigned to intramuscular injection of V591 or placebo (4:1 ratio). In part 1, younger adults (18-55 years) received V591 median tissue culture infectious dose (TCID50)-levels of 1 105 pound or 1 106 pound or placebo, 56 days apart. In part 2, younger and older (>55 years) adults received a single dose of one of four (104/ 105/106/107) or one of two (105/106) V591 TCID50 levels, respectively, or placebo. Primary outcome: safety/tolerability. Secondary outcome: humoral immunogenicity. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04498247. Findings From August-December 2020, 444 participants were screened and 263 randomised (210 V591; 53 placebo); 262 received at least one and 10 received two doses of V591 or placebo. Adverse events were experienced by 140/209 (67.0%) V591 dose-group participants and 37/53 (69.8%) placebo-group participants following injection 1; most frequent were fatigue (57 [27.3%] vs 20 [37.7%]), headache (57 [27.3%] vs 19 [35.8%]), myalgia (35 [16.7%] vs 10 [18.9%]), and injection-site pain (35 [16.7%] vs 4 [7.5%]). No deaths nor vaccine-related serious adverse events occurred. At Day 29, no anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike serum neutralising antibody and IgG-responses were identified in placebo or the three lower V591 dose-groups; responses were detected with V591 1 107 pound TCID50, although titres were lower than convalescent serum. Interpretation V591 was generally well tolerated, but immunogenicity was insufficient to warrant continued development. Copyright (c) 2022 Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ USA and The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

Aims Two phase 1, open-label studies were conducted to investigate the effect of renal impairment (RI) and organic anion transporter (OAT) inhibition on pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of relebactam (REL) plus imipenem/cilastatin (IMI). Methods Study PN005 evaluated the PK of REL (125 mg) plus IMI (250 mg) in participants with RI vs healthy controls. Study PN019 evaluated the PK of REL (250 mg) and imipenem (500 mg; dosed as IMI) with/without probenecid (1 g; OAT inhibitor) in healthy adults. Results Geometric mean ratios (RI/healthy matched controls) of area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC(0-infinity); 90% confidence interval) for REL, imipenem and cilastatin increased as RI increased from mild (1.6 [1.1, 2.4], 1.4 [1.1, 1.8] and 1.6 [1.0, 2.5], respectively) to severe (4.9 [3.4, 7.0], 2.5 [1.9, 3.3] and 5.6 [3.6, 8.6], respectively). For all 3 analytes, plasma and renal clearance decreased and corresponding plasma apparent terminal half-life increased with increasing RI. Geometric mean ratios ([probenecid+IMI/REL]/[IMI/REL]) of plasma exposure for REL and imipenem were 1.24 (1.19, 1.28) and 1.16 (1.13, 1.20), respectively. The dose fraction excreted (fe) in the urine decreased progressively from mild to severe RI. Probenecid reduced renal clearance of REL and imipenem by 25 and 31%, respectively. Compared with IMI/REL, coadministration of IMI/REL with probenecid yielded lower fe for REL and imipenem. In both studies, treatment was well tolerated; there were no serious adverse events or discontinuations due to adverse events. Conclusion RI increased plasma exposure and similarly decreased clearance of REL, imipenem and cilastatin; IMI/REL dose adjustment (fixed-ratio) will be required for patients with RI. Probenecid had no clinically meaningful impact on the PK of REL or imipenem.

The effects of supratherapeutic doses of intravenous (IV) relebactam on duration of ventricular depolarization and subsequent repolarization were assessed in a thorough QT/corrected QT study. This was a single-dose, double-blind (relebactam only), randomized, placebo- and positive-controlled, 3-period, balanced crossover study in healthy participants. Participants received in randomized order, and separated by a washout (≥4 days), a single dose of IV relebactam 1150 mg, oral moxifloxacin 400 mg (open-label positive control), and IV placebo. Least squares mean and 2-sided 90% confidence interval for change from baseline in population-derived corrected QT intervals for relebactam, moxifloxacin, and placebo were estimated for 24 hours. The upper limit of the 90% confidence interval of all least squares mean population-derived corrected QT treatment differences from placebo was not >10 milliseconds at any time point for 24 hours. Corrected QT assay sensitivity was confirmed with moxifloxacin treatment. Analysis of electrocardiogram parameters resulted in no additional cardiac safety concerns. Overall, a supratherapeutic dose of relebactam yielded no cardiac safety events; the 1150-mg supratherapeutic dose (4.6-fold above the 250-mg therapeutic dose) was not associated with QT prolongation or other abnormal cardiodynamic parameters. This study lends additional support to relebactam's use as a β-lactamase inhibitor in antimicrobial therapy.

Volume 62, no. 9, e00280-18, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00280-18. The Acknowledgments section was incomplete and should appear as shown below. At the time the study was conducted, E.G.R., M.L.R., N.C., M.N., M.S.S., E.M., K.B., P.B., F.C.-G., P.J., Y.L., and J.R.B. were employees of Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA (MSD), and they may own stock and/or stock options in the company. S.J.W. is an employee of Hammersmith Medicines Research Ltd., London, UK. Funding for this research was provided by MSD. All authors are responsible for the work described in this paper. All authors were involved in at least one of the following: study conception and design of work or acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; and drafting the manuscript and/or revising/reviewing the manuscript for important intellectual content. All authors provided final approval of the version to be published. All authors agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved. Medical writing and/or editorial assistance was provided by Stephanie Doerner and Alanna Kennedy of The Lockwood Group, Stamford, CT, USA. This assistance was funded by MSD.

Relebactam is a novel class A and C β-lactamase inhibitor that is being developed in combination with imipenem-cilastatin for the treatment of serious infections with Gram-negative bacteria. Here we report on two phase 1 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability studies of relebactam administered with or without imipenem-cilastatin to healthy participants: (i) a single-dose (25 to 1,150 mg) and multiple-dose (50 to 625 mg every 6 h [q6h] for 7 to 14 days) escalation study with men and (ii) a single-dose (125 mg) study with women and elderly individuals. Following single- or multiple-dose intravenous administration over 30 min, plasma relebactam concentrations declined biexponentially, with a terminal half-life (t1/2) ranging from 1.35 to 1.85 h independently of the dose. Exposures increased in a dose-proportional manner across the dose range. No clinically significant differences in pharmacokinetics between men and women, or between adult and elderly participants, were observed. Urine pharmacokinetics demonstrated that urinary excretion is the major route of relebactam elimination. No drug-drug interaction between relebactam and imipenem-cilastatin was observed, and the observed t1/2 values for relebactam, imipenem, and cilastatin were comparable, thus supporting coadministration. Relebactam administered alone or in combination with imipenem-cilastatin was well tolerated across the dose ranges studied. No serious adverse events or deaths were reported. The pharmacokinetic profile and favorable safety results supported q6h dosing of relebactam with imipenem-cilastatin in clinical treatment trials.