Clinical immunogenicity and tolerance studies of liquid vaccines delivered by jet-injector and a new single-use cartridge (Imule): comparison with standard syringe injection. Imule Investigators Group

Jet injectors: Perspectives for small volume delivery with lasers

Needle-free jet injectors have been proposed as an alternative to injections with hypodermic needles. Currently, a handful of commercial needle-free jet injectors already exist. However, these injectors are designed for specific injections, typically limited to large injection volumes into the deeper layers beneath the skin. There is growing evidence of advantages when delivering small volumes into the superficial skin layers, namely the epidermis and dermis. Injections such as vaccines and insulin would benefit from delivery into these superficial layers. Furthermore, the same technology for small volume needle-free injections can serve (medical) tattooing as well as other personalized medicine treatments. The research dedicated to needle-free jet injectors actuated by laser energy has increased in the last decade. In this case, the absorption of the optical energy by the liquid results in an explosively growing bubble. This bubble displaces the rest of the liquid, resulting in a fast microfluidic jet which can penetrate the skin. This technique allows for precise control over volumes (pL to µL) and penetration depths (µm to mm). Furthermore, these injections can be tuned without changing the device, by varying parameters such as laser power, beam diameter and filling level of the liquid container. Despite the published research on the working principles and capabilities of individual laser-actuated jet injectors, a thorough overview encompassing all of them is lacking. In this perspective, we will discuss the current status of laser-based jet injectors and contrast their advantages and limitations, as well as their potential and challenges.

Subcutaneous vaccine administration - an outmoded practice

Subcutaneous vaccine (SC) administration is an outmoded practice which complicates vaccine administration recommendations. Local adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) are a recognized determinant of vaccine hesitancy/refusal which can lead to an increased prevalence of vaccine-preventable disease.

This extensive narrative review provides high-grade evidence that intramuscular (IM) administration of all vaccine types [adjuvanted, live virus and non-adjuvanted (inactivated whole cell, split cell and subunit)] significantly reduces the likelihood of local adverse events. This, combined with moderate grade evidence that IM injection generates significantly greater immune response compared with SC injection, allows a strong recommendation to be made for the IM injection of all vaccines except BCG and Rotavirus.

This will simplify vaccination practice, minimize the inadvertent misadministration of vaccines and potentially improve public trust in vaccination.

What's New in Vaccine Science

Today vaccines can provide immunity against and treatment of a growing number of diseases including noninfectious conditions. Vaccine science continues to evolve newer and safer ways to deliver prevention and treatment of infectious and noninfectious diseases. This includes new adjuvants to enhance immunogenicity; delivery systems to reduce pain and improve acceptability; a wider range of uses including preventing emerging infectious diseases, such as Zika virus and Ebola, treatment of chronic diseases, such as cancer, and autoimmune disorders; and repurposing of existing vaccines, such as bacillus Calmette-Guérin for novel therapies.

Prospective, double blind, randomized, controlled trial comparing vapocoolant spray versus placebo spray in adults undergoing intravenous cannulation

OBJECTIVES

Painful diagnostic and therapeutic procedures are common in the health care setting. Eliminating, or at least, minimizing the pain associated with various procedures should be a priority. Although there are many benefits of providing local/topical anesthesia prior to performing painful procedures, ranging from greater patient/family satisfaction to increased procedural success rates; local/topical anesthetics are frequently not used. Reasons include the need for a needlestick to administer local anesthetics such as lidocaine and the long onset for topical anesthetics. Vapocoolants eliminate the risks associated with needlesticks, avoids the tissue distortion with intradermal local anesthetics, eliminates needlestick pain, have a quick almost instantaneous onset, are easy to apply, require no skills or devices to apply, are convenient, and inexpensive. The aims of this study were to ascertain if peripheral intravenous (PIV) cannulation pain would be significantly decreased by using a vapocoolant (V) versus sterile water placebo (S) spray, as determined by a reduction of at least ≥1.8 points on numerical rating scale (NRS) after vapocoolant versus placebo spray, the side effects and incidence of side effects from a vapocoolant spray; and whether there were any long term visible skin abnormalities associated with the use of a vapocoolant spray.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled trial of 300 adults (ages 18-80) requiring PIV placement in a hospital ED, randomized to S (N=150) or V (N=150) prior to PIV. Efficacy outcome was the difference in PIV pain: NRS from 0 (none) to worst (10). Safety outcomes included a skin checklist for local adverse effects (i.e., redness, blanching, edema, ecchymosis, itching, changes in skin pigmentation), vital sign (VS) changes, and before/after photographs of the PIV site.

RESULTS

Patient demographics (age, gender, race), comorbidity, medications, and vital signs; and PIV procedure variables (e.g., IV needle size, location, number of IV attempts, type and experience of healthcare provider performing the IV) were not significantly different for the two groups. Median (interquartile range) PIV pain was 4 (2, 7) (S) and 2 (0, 4) (V) (P<0.001). Skin checklist revealed minimal erythema: S 0% (N=0/150), V: 2.7% (4/150), which resolved within 5min, and no blanching, skin pigmentation changes, itching, edema, or ecchymosis. Photographs at 5-10min revealed no visible skin changes in any patient (N=300), vapocoolant (N=150) or placebo groups (N=150). Complaints (N=26) were coolness/cold feeling S 8.7% (N=13), V 7.3% (N=11), coolness/numbness S 0% (N=0), V 0.7% (N=1), and burning S 0.7% (N=1), V 0 (0%). Patient acceptance of the vapocoolant spray was high: 82% (123/150) of the patients stated they would use the spray in the future, while only 40.7% (61/150) of the placebo group stated they would use the placebo spray in the future.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Vapocoolant spray significantly decreased peripheral intravenous cannulation pain in adults versus placebo spray and was well tolerated with minor adverse effects that resolved quickly. There were no significant differences in vital signs and no visible skin changes documented by photographs taken within 5-10min postspray/PIV.

Infants and the seasonal influenza vaccine. A global perspective on safety, effectiveness, and alternate forms of protection

Seasonal influenza is a substantial cause of severe illness among infants under 6 months of age globally. There are multiple methods of vaccination against influenza, including inactivated and live vaccines that are approved and recommended for children and adults over 6 months of age, but there is no vaccine that protects against seasonal influenza for children <6 months of age. This group is at a high risk of severe illness and is associated with higher rates of hospitalization and mortality during the influenza season. In absence of an available vaccine, approaches protecting young infants from influenza must be taken seriously. These methods include vaccinating pregnant women for influenza as a method of protecting mothers and the fetus as well as vaccinating caregivers and close contacts of individuals in this age group.

Needle-free jet injection for administration of influenza vaccine: a randomised non-inferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Administration of vaccines by needle-free technology such as jet injection might offer an alternative to needles and syringes that avoids the issue of needle phobia and the risk of needle-stick injury. We aimed to assess the immunogenicity and safety of trivalent influenza vaccine given by needle-free jet injector compared with needle and syringe.

METHODS

For this randomised, comparator-controlled trial, we randomly assigned (1:1) healthy adults (aged 18-64 years) who attended one of four employee health clinics in the University of Colorado health system, with stratification by site, to receive one dose of the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine Afluria given either intramuscularly with a needle-free jet injector (Stratis; PharmaJet, Golden, CO, USA) or with needle and syringe. Randomisation was done with a computer-generated randomisation schedule with a block size of 100. Because of the nature of the study, masking of participants was not possible. Immunogenicity was assessed by measurement of the hemagglutination inhibition antibody titres in serum for the three viral strains included in the vaccine. We included six coprimary endpoints: three strain-specific geometric mean titre ratios and the absolute differences in three strain-specific seroconversion rates. The immune response of the jet injector group was regarded as non-inferior to that of the needle and syringe group if both the upper bound of each of the three 95% CIs for the strain-specific geometric mean titre ratios was 1.5 or less, and the upper bound of the three 95% CIs for the strain-specific seroconversion rate differences was less than 10 percentage points. We used t test for group comparison. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01688921.

FINDINGS

During the 2012-13 influenza season of the northern hemisphere, we allocated 1250 participants to receive vaccination by needle-free jet injector (n=627) or needle and syringe (n=623). In the intention-to-treat immunogenicity population, all participants with two serum samples were included (575 in the jet injector group and 574 in the needle and syringe group). The immune response to Afluria when given by needle-free jet injector met the criteria for non-inferiority for all six coprimary endpoints. The jet injector group met the geometric mean titre criterion for non-inferiority for the A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains (upper bound of the 95% CI for the geometric mean titre ratios were 1·10 for A/H1N1, 1·17 for A/H3N2, and 1·04 for B strains). The jet injector group met the seroconversion rate criterion for non-inferiority for the A/H1N1, A/H3N2, and B strains (upper bound of the 95% CI of the seroconversion rate differences were 6·0% for A/H1N1, 7·0% for A/H3N2, and 5·7% for B strains). We recorded serious adverse events in three participants, none of which were study related.

INTERPRETATION

The immune response to influenza vaccine given with the jet injector device was non-inferior to the immune response to influenza vaccine given with needle and syringe. The device had a clinically acceptable safety profile, but was associated with a higher frequency of local injection site reactions than was the use of needle and syringe. The Stratis needle-free jet injector device could be used as an alternative method of administration of Afluria trivalent influenza vaccine.

FUNDING

Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), PATH, bioCSL, and PharmaJet.

Antigen delivery systems

Many vaccine candidates are highly purified, sometimes monomeric antigens and as a result, not very immunogenic. Antigen delivery systems optimize the presentation of antigens. They also play a major role in solving the problem of there being an increasing number of vaccines but limited opportunities in which to include these vaccines in immunization programs. The number of injections is restricted and combining vaccines may lead to immunological and physicochemical incompatibility. In this review, the current status with respect to parenteral and mucosal delivery systems is discussed. These include lipid-based systems such as liposomes and immunostimulating complexes, as well as polymeric microspheres. In addition, developments in needle-free, dermal delivery devices such as jet injectors, microneedles and patches are presented.

Delivering vaccines into the skin without needles and syringes

The skin is a highly accessible organ and due to the presence of powerful antigen-presenting cells in the epidermis, it functions as an immune barrier. This makes the skin an attractive route for potential delivery of vaccines by painless and user-friendly methods without the requirement of needles and syringes. This article reviews current attempts to administer vaccines into the skin and discusses some of the scientific issues related to the emerging delivery technologies.

Syringe free vaccination with CAF01 Adjuvated Ag85B-ESAT-6 in Bioneedles provides strong and prolonged protection against tuberculosis

Bioneedles are small hollow sugar based needles administered with a simple compressed air device. In the present study we investigate how incorporation of a subunit vaccine based on TB vaccine hybrid Ag85B-ESAT-6 adjuvated with CAF01 into Bioneedles affects its immunogenicity as well as its ability to protect against TB in a mouse model. The CMI response measured by IFN-γ and antigen specific CD4+ T-cells was, two weeks after the last vaccination, significantly lower in the group immunized with Bioneedle-incorporated vaccine compared to the conventional vaccine, using syringe and needle. However, at four, nine and 52 weeks after vaccination we observed similar high IFN-γ levels in the Bioneedle group and the group vaccinated using syringe and needle and comparable levels of antigen specific T-cells. Furthermore, the protective efficacy for the two vaccination methods was comparable and similar to BCG vaccination both six and 52 weeks after vaccination. These results therefore advocate the further development of the Bioneedle devises and applicators for the delivery of human vaccines.

Intradermal vaccine delivery: will new delivery systems transform vaccine administration?

There has been a recent resurgence of interest in intradermal vaccine delivery. The physiological advantages of intradermal vaccine delivery have been known for some time, but the difficulties associated with performing an intradermal injection have historically limited its use. New delivery systems currently in development facilitate convenient intradermal vaccination, unlocking the potential advantages of this delivery route, and potentially transforming vaccine delivery.

Needle-free vaccine delivery

The need for minimally invasive delivery methods is urgent. As the number of registered vaccines increases, so does the number of injections. The use of sharps can be unsafe and needle immunisation is less suitable for mass immunisations during emergencies such as pandemics or bioterrorist attacks. The approach of combining vaccines has limitations due to high development costs, risk of pharmaceutical or immunological interference and economic risks. Advancements in the development of alternatives to injection with syringes and needles are discussed in this paper, and include: mucosal vaccination, injection without needles and vaccine delivery via the skin.

Downregulation of IgE antibody and allergic responses in the lung by epidermal biolistic microparticle delivery

BACKGROUND

Biolistic injections provide a needle-free delivery of antigen-laden microparticles to the epithelium. The precision of the injection preferentially targets the Langerhans cell network, which, although ideal for vaccination, might not be suitable for the downregulation of immune responses in immunotherapy.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the ability of biolistic injection of antigen into the epithelium of sensitized mice to inhibit IgE antibody and lung inflammatory responses produced by further exposure to antigen.

METHODS

Mice were sensitized by means of a needle injection of ovalbumin (OVA) in alum and given a series of biolistic injections of OVA or vehicle control, followed by a boost of OVA in alum. Serum IgE and IgG antibodies were measured before and after the boost. The mice were then challenged intranasally, and the infiltration of inflammatory cells was measured by means of bronchoalveolar lavage. Airway reactivity of the challenged mice was measured by examining responses to methacholine with forced oscillatory techniques.

RESULTS

Biolistic injection of OVA into the dorsal skin of sensitized mice markedly inhibited IgE and IgG1 antibody responses induced by boosting. IgG2a antibody responses were reduced rather than stimulated. The eosinophilic inflammation in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid induced by intranasal challenge was also markedly inhibited. Lung hyperreactivity showed an initial increase and then a decrease of responsiveness to methacholine, with elastance returning to the level of unsensitized mice. Biolistic injection into the buccal epithelium was also inhibitory.

CONCLUSIONS

Biolistic injection of allergen inhibited the boosting of IgE antibody and eosinophilic lung inflammatory responses without inducing T(H)1 immunity.

Novel approaches to vaccine delivery

Although the currently available vaccines represent an outstanding success story in modern medicine and have had a dramatic effect on morbidity and mortality worldwide, it is clear that improvements are required in the current vaccine delivery technologies. Improvements are required to enable the successful development of vaccines against infectious diseases that have so far proven difficult to control with conventional approaches. Improvements may include the addition of novel injectable adjuvants or the use of novel routes of delivery, including mucosal immunization. Mucosal delivery may be required to provide protection against pathogens that infect at mucosal sites, including sexually transmitted diseases. Alternatively, novel approaches to delivery, including mucosal administration, may be used to improve compliance for existing vaccines. Of particular interest for safer mass immunization campaigns are needle-free delivery devices, which would avoid problems due to needle re-use in many parts of the world and would avoid needle-stick injuries.

Topical vapocoolant quickly and effectively reduces vaccine-associated pain: results of a randomized, single-blinded, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

Comprehensive international travel preparation often requires several vaccines. Up to 90% of adults have some fear of injections, mostly due to injection-related pain. Pediatric studies with routine vaccines have shown topical anesthetic EMLA cream (lidocaine and prilocaine, Astra Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and the topical vapocoolant Fluori-Methane (dichlorodifluoromethane and trichlorodifluoromethane, Gebauer Co.) to be equally effective in reducing pain from vaccinations. EMLA cream is expensive and requires a 60-min application, while Fluori-Methane (FM) is immediate in onset of action and inexpensive. Skin anesthesia begins at 10 degrees C. Fluori-Methane can briefly cool the skin to 0 degrees C.

METHODS

We studied the effectiveness of topical vapocoolant on adult clients at our international travel clinic in a randomized, controlled trial of topical FM vs. cold (4 degrees C) saline placebo. Using a preset randomization table, participants served as their own controls, receiving placebo/control or active agent (participant blinded) in one arm (left or right), and a similar number of vaccines in the untreated arm. Vaccines were administered according to a set protocol per arm to minimize the risk of bias. Pain was measured using a modified McGill present pain intensity (PPI) pain index. Subjects rated their pain immediately and at 5 min on a six-level scale, noting treated and untreated arms separately. A questionnaire was completed on intervention preferences. Sample size was predetermined to achieve 90% statistical power estimating 25% efficacy (minimum n=172).

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty-five participants were enrolled; 93 FM and 92 cold saline placebo. FM-treated arms had a significant reduction in immediate pain compared to untreated arms (pain scale mean 2.2 vs. 3.1; p<.0001), and compared to placebo (mean 2.2 vs. 2.8; p<.01). Delayed pain at 5 min was not affected by FM or control (mean 1.9 vs. 2.0) compared to no intervention (pain scale 1.9). The intervention preference questionnaire indicated that participants did not find FM therapy uncomfortable. They would choose FM therapy in the future, over a cream, especially if a wait was involved.

CONCLUSION

The topical vapocoolant Fluori-Methane is an effective, quick, preferred, inexpensive agent for reducing vaccine-associated injection pain for international travel clients.

Recent advances in the discovery and delivery of vaccine adjuvants

Adjuvant design has historically had a touch of alchemy at its heart due to its reliance on the complex biology of innate immune activation. However, a new mechanistic understanding of innate immunity, combined with new adjuvant and delivery platforms for exploiting this knowledge, has led to significant advances recently. Although many challenges remain, the field is moving rapidly and the proper tools and methodologies are in place for the use of traditional drug discovery engines in guiding the development of vaccine adjuvants. In this review, we outline the current trends in immune potentiator, delivery system and adjuvant design that will shape the vaccines of the future.

Safety, tolerability, and lack of antibody responses after administration of a PfCSP DNA malaria vaccine via needle or needle-free jet injection, and comparison of intramuscular and combination intramuscular/intradermal routes

Introduction of a new vaccine requires choosing a delivery system that provides safe administration and the desired level of immunogenicity. The safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of three monthly 2.5-mg doses of a PfCSP DNA vaccine were evaluated in healthy volunteers as administered intramuscularly (IM) by needle, IM by jet injection (Biojector or IM/intradermally (ID) by jet injection. Vaccine administration was well-tolerated. Adverse events were primarily mild and limited to the site of injection (98%). Jet injections (either IM or ID) were associated with approximately twice as many adverse events per immunization as needle IM, but nevertheless were strongly and consistently preferred in opinion polls taken during the study. No volunteers had clinically significant biochemical or hematologic changes or detectable anti-dsDNA antibodies. In conclusion, the injection of Plasmodium falciparum circumsporozoite (PfCSP) DNA vaccine appeared to be safe and well-tolerated when administered by any of the three modes of delivery. However, despite improved antibody responses following both jet injection and ID delivery in animal models, no antibodies could be detected in volunteers by immunofluorescence antibody test (IFAT) or enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) after DNA vaccination.

Delivery technologies for human vaccines

There is currently intense research activity aimed at the development of new delivery systems for vaccines. The goal is to identify optimal methods for presenting target antigens to the immune system in a manner that will elicit immune responses appropriate for protection against, or treatment of, a specific disease. Several different approaches to this general goal have been developed, some are empirical and remain poorly understood, others are more rational, being based, for example, on mimicking natural infections in vivo or on targeting particular features of the immune system. This article will review three categories of delivery systems: (i) adjuvants and formulations; (ii) antigen vectors, including live attenuated micro-organisms and synthetic vectors; and (iii) novel devices for vaccine administration. The review will be restricted to late stage developments in the field of human vaccination.

Safety and immunogenicity of varying dosages of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine administered by needle-free jet injectors

To evaluate the perceived pain, other adverse events, and immunogenicity of influenza virus vaccine administered by needle-free jet injector (JI) compared with that of vaccine administered by needle and syringe (N&S), we randomly assigned 304 healthy young adults to receive one of three dosages (0.5, 0.3, or 0.2 ml) of the 1998-1999 season vaccine administered by either of two JI devices or by N&S. In multivariate analysis, female gender and JI administration were associated with higher levels of pain reported at the time of vaccination as well as with the occurrence of local injection site reactions following vaccination. Immune response did not vary significantly by dosage but administration by one JI device was associated with higher post-vaccination H1N1 antibody titers.

Serum and mucosal immune responses to an inactivated influenza virus vaccine induced by epidermal powder immunization

Both circulating and mucosal antibodies are considered important for protection against infection by influenza virus in humans and animals. However, current inactivated vaccines administered by intramuscular injection using a syringe and needle elicit primarily circulating antibodies. In this study, we report that epidermal powder immunization (EPI) via a unique powder delivery system elicits both serum and mucosal antibodies to an inactivated influenza virus vaccine. Serum antibody responses to influenza vaccine following EPI were enhanced by codelivery of cholera toxin (CT), a synthetic oligodeoxynucleotide containing immunostimulatory CpG motifs (CpG DNA), or the combination of these two adjuvants. In addition, secretory immunoglobulin A (sIgA) antibodies were detected in the saliva and mucosal lavages of the small intestine, trachea, and vaginal tract, although the titers were much lower than the IgG titers. The local origin of the sIgA antibodies was further shown by measuring antibodies released from cultured tracheal and small intestinal fragments and by detecting antigen-specific IgA-secreting cells in the lamina propria using ELISPOT assays. EPI with a single dose of influenza vaccine containing CT or CT and CpG DNA conferred complete protection against lethal challenges with an influenza virus isolated 30 years ago, whereas a prime and boost immunizations were required for protection in the absence of an adjuvant. The ability to elicit augmented circulating antibody and mucosal antibody responses makes EPI a promising alternative to needle injection for administering vaccines against influenza and other diseases.

Hepatitis A vaccine administration: comparison between jet-injector and needle injection

INTRODUCTION

Type A hepatitis virus (HAV) is a serious health problem throughout the world and can be spread via fecal-oral contact. Both immune globulin and an HAV vaccine provide protection, but the vaccine gives complete protection. Efficacy of methods of vaccination in relation to the formation of anti-HAV antibodies is unclear; thus, this study seeks to determine if significant differences exist between the syringe as compared to the jet injection technique. The purpose of this study was to compare in a randomized trial Biojet jet-injection system to a needle-syringe method. To determine if a significant difference between these two methods in seroconversion rates or geometric mean titers of anti HAV antibody occurs at day 15, 30, and 210 days after vaccination.

METHOD

Anti-HAV IgG(-) adult hospital employees were randomized to receive 1440 EL.U of hepatitis a vaccine (HAVRIX(R)) in 2 doses by either needle or jet-injector (Biojector(R)) system at month 0 and 6. HAV seroconversion titer results were measured by the Boehringer-Mannheim method.

RESULTS/DISCUSSION

A higher proportion of persons who received HAV vaccine via the Biojector(R) seroconverted with anti-HAV level >/=20 mIU at day 15, 30, and month 7 when compared with a needle injection.Side-effect profiles reported by participants in both methods were below those identified in current published and insert information, but the Biojector(R) had greater local reactivity in all categories when compared to the needle method.

Maintaining and enhancing vaccine immunogenicity

This contribution highlights factors involved with maintaining and enhancing antigen delivery or immunogenicity. Areas discussed include the cold chain, adjuvants, recombinant vectors for antigen delivery, routes for antigen delivery, and edible plant vaccines. It is doubtless that the technological understanding that underlies these advances is about to revolutionize vaccinology in the near future.