Collaborative study for the validation of serological methods for potency testing of diphtheria toxoid vaccines-part 1.

Pharmeuropa bio Pub Date : 2004-01-01
R Winsnes, D Sesardic, A Daas, M-E Behr-Gross
{"title":"Collaborative study for the validation of serological methods for potency testing of diphtheria toxoid vaccines-part 1.","authors":"R Winsnes,&nbsp;D Sesardic,&nbsp;A Daas,&nbsp;M-E Behr-Gross","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A collaborative study on the evaluation of an alternative functional assay, the Vero cell method, to the Ph. Eur. in vivo challenge procedures for potency determination of diphtheria toxoid in 6 different combined vaccines was initiated in January 2001. The study was an extension of a previous study for the validation of serological methods for potency testing of tetanus toxoid vaccines for human use. To allow interim evaluation of test results and to monitor study progress, the project was divided into three consecutive phases. The results of Phase I and II studies are presented in this report. Pre-validation (Phase I) study, performed in two laboratories, indicated that comparable diphtheria potency estimates were obtained in the Ph. Eur. direct intradermal challenge assay in guinea pigs, in Vero cell assay and in indirect ELISA for five vaccines of different potencies (range of estimates: ca. 20-200 IU/ml). The correlation coefficients between the challenge assay and the Vero cell assay corresponded to those between the challenge assay and ELISA, confirming that the antibodies play an important role in protection and that predominantly protective/neutralising antibodies are present in guinea pigs, at the time point investigated. It was observed, for Vero cell assays, that about 16-35 (9-28 in Phase II study) fold lower titre of individual serum samples were obtained when using equine, rather than guinea pig reference serum. The study also provided preliminary information that sera from the same guinea pigs may be used for potency determination of both diphtheria and tetanus toxoid components of vaccines. In Phase II, another five laboratories analysed a subset of the vaccines included in Phase I study plus an additional vaccine. Four laboratories performed the lethal challenge assay and one laboratory carried out the intradermal challenge assay. All laboratories also performed the Vero cell assay and both ELISA for diphtheria antitoxin and ELISA for tetanus antitoxin. One laboratory also performed the tetanus ToBI assay. The correlation coefficient (r) between Vero cell assay and ELISA for diphtheria antitoxin ranged from 0.76 to 0.91 in the different laboratories. The correlation between diphtheria serological assays and challenge assays were confirmed satisfactory as ca. 90 per cent of serum-estimates lead to correct prediction of mortality. All laboratories had identical rankings of the vaccines in all serological assays and in the valid challenge assays. The ranking order was identical to assumed/provided potency for the highest and the lowest vaccine. Two of the vaccines had an inversion in some assays and laboratories. As these two vaccines have almost identical potencies in all assays, these inversions are not significant. As the vaccine doses were optimised for the diphtheria component, serum anti-tetanus toxoid/toxin activities varied widely between the vaccines, making it questionable to apply a parallel line model to calculate exact potencies. However, the dose levels used showed a clear regression and good linearity in general. DTaP vaccines containing the IPV component did not always meet the present Ph. Eur. requirements in the serological assays. It should be further investigated in the Phase III study if this is a general feature of such combined vaccines. Preliminary investigations on samples from two laboratories indicate that the neutralising activity of type 1, 2 and 3 polioviruses can also be detected, in a dose-dependent way. Further studies are in progress with serum samples from other laboratories. In the light of results obtained in the first two phases, it is recommended to proceed with Phase III study to investigate reliability of the in vitro assays. In Phase III it will also be further investigated whether the serological assays for D and T components are suitable for the control of the multi-component vaccines currently marketed in Europe.</p>","PeriodicalId":86996,"journal":{"name":"Pharmeuropa bio","volume":"2003 2","pages":"35-68"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmeuropa bio","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

A collaborative study on the evaluation of an alternative functional assay, the Vero cell method, to the Ph. Eur. in vivo challenge procedures for potency determination of diphtheria toxoid in 6 different combined vaccines was initiated in January 2001. The study was an extension of a previous study for the validation of serological methods for potency testing of tetanus toxoid vaccines for human use. To allow interim evaluation of test results and to monitor study progress, the project was divided into three consecutive phases. The results of Phase I and II studies are presented in this report. Pre-validation (Phase I) study, performed in two laboratories, indicated that comparable diphtheria potency estimates were obtained in the Ph. Eur. direct intradermal challenge assay in guinea pigs, in Vero cell assay and in indirect ELISA for five vaccines of different potencies (range of estimates: ca. 20-200 IU/ml). The correlation coefficients between the challenge assay and the Vero cell assay corresponded to those between the challenge assay and ELISA, confirming that the antibodies play an important role in protection and that predominantly protective/neutralising antibodies are present in guinea pigs, at the time point investigated. It was observed, for Vero cell assays, that about 16-35 (9-28 in Phase II study) fold lower titre of individual serum samples were obtained when using equine, rather than guinea pig reference serum. The study also provided preliminary information that sera from the same guinea pigs may be used for potency determination of both diphtheria and tetanus toxoid components of vaccines. In Phase II, another five laboratories analysed a subset of the vaccines included in Phase I study plus an additional vaccine. Four laboratories performed the lethal challenge assay and one laboratory carried out the intradermal challenge assay. All laboratories also performed the Vero cell assay and both ELISA for diphtheria antitoxin and ELISA for tetanus antitoxin. One laboratory also performed the tetanus ToBI assay. The correlation coefficient (r) between Vero cell assay and ELISA for diphtheria antitoxin ranged from 0.76 to 0.91 in the different laboratories. The correlation between diphtheria serological assays and challenge assays were confirmed satisfactory as ca. 90 per cent of serum-estimates lead to correct prediction of mortality. All laboratories had identical rankings of the vaccines in all serological assays and in the valid challenge assays. The ranking order was identical to assumed/provided potency for the highest and the lowest vaccine. Two of the vaccines had an inversion in some assays and laboratories. As these two vaccines have almost identical potencies in all assays, these inversions are not significant. As the vaccine doses were optimised for the diphtheria component, serum anti-tetanus toxoid/toxin activities varied widely between the vaccines, making it questionable to apply a parallel line model to calculate exact potencies. However, the dose levels used showed a clear regression and good linearity in general. DTaP vaccines containing the IPV component did not always meet the present Ph. Eur. requirements in the serological assays. It should be further investigated in the Phase III study if this is a general feature of such combined vaccines. Preliminary investigations on samples from two laboratories indicate that the neutralising activity of type 1, 2 and 3 polioviruses can also be detected, in a dose-dependent way. Further studies are in progress with serum samples from other laboratories. In the light of results obtained in the first two phases, it is recommended to proceed with Phase III study to investigate reliability of the in vitro assays. In Phase III it will also be further investigated whether the serological assays for D and T components are suitable for the control of the multi-component vaccines currently marketed in Europe.

白喉类毒素疫苗效价检测血清学方法验证的合作研究——第1部分。
一项关于评估替代功能分析的合作研究,Vero细胞方法,以Ph. Eur。2001年1月启动了测定6种不同联合疫苗中白喉类毒素效力的体内激发程序。这项研究是先前一项研究的延伸,该研究旨在验证用于人类使用的破伤风类毒素疫苗效力检测的血清学方法。为了对测试结果进行中期评估和监测研究进展,该项目被分为三个连续的阶段。本报告介绍了I期和II期研究的结果。在两个实验室进行的预验证(I期)研究表明,在Ph. Eur中获得了可比的白喉效力估计。豚鼠直接皮内攻击试验、Vero细胞试验和间接ELISA检测五种不同效力的疫苗(估计范围:约20-200 IU/ml)。攻击试验和Vero细胞试验之间的相关系数与攻击试验和ELISA之间的相关系数相对应,证实抗体在保护中起重要作用,并且在调查的时间点上,豚鼠体内主要存在保护性/中和性抗体。我们观察到,在Vero细胞测定中,使用马而不是豚鼠参考血清时,获得的单个血清样品滴度降低了约16-35倍(在II期研究中为9-28倍)。该研究还提供了初步信息,即来自同一豚鼠的血清可用于白喉和破伤风疫苗类毒素成分的效力测定。在第二阶段,另外五个实验室分析了第一阶段研究中包括的一部分疫苗和一种额外的疫苗。4个实验室进行致死攻击试验,1个实验室进行皮内攻击试验。所有实验室还进行了Vero细胞测定和白喉抗毒素和破伤风抗毒素的ELISA。一个实验室也进行了破伤风ToBI测定。不同实验室Vero细胞法与ELISA法检测白喉抗毒素的相关系数r在0.76 ~ 0.91之间。白喉血清学分析和攻毒分析之间的相关性得到了令人满意的证实,因为大约90%的血清估计可正确预测死亡率。所有实验室在所有血清学分析和有效攻毒分析中对疫苗的排名相同。排名顺序与假设/提供的最高和最低疫苗效力相同。其中两种疫苗在一些化验和实验室中出现反转。由于这两种疫苗在所有检测中几乎具有相同的效力,因此这些倒置并不显著。由于疫苗剂量针对白喉成分进行了优化,不同疫苗的血清抗破伤风类毒素活性差异很大,因此应用平行线模型计算确切效力存在问题。然而,所使用的剂量水平总体上显示出明显的回归和良好的线性。含有IPV成分的DTaP疫苗并不总是符合目前的Ph. Eur标准。血清学分析的要求。如果这是此类联合疫苗的普遍特征,则应在III期研究中进一步研究。对来自两个实验室的样本进行的初步调查表明,还可以以剂量依赖的方式检测到1型、2型和3型脊髓灰质炎病毒的中和活性。正在对其他实验室的血清样本进行进一步研究。根据前两期获得的结果,建议进行第三期研究,以调查体外测定的可靠性。在第三阶段,还将进一步调查D和T组分的血清学分析是否适用于目前在欧洲销售的多组分疫苗的控制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信