Phase I of clinical HIV vaccine trial successful

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the recent completion of Phase I clinical trials for a preventative HIV vaccine (SAV001-H) developed by Sumagen Canada Inc and Western University. Participants express excitement about the trial's safety results while raising questions about efficacy, the challenges posed by HIV's mutation and strain diversity, and the implications for future research and vaccine development.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants note that Phase I trials primarily assess safety, not efficacy, highlighting the need for further studies.
  • There are concerns about how the vaccine will address the many strains of HIV and the virus's mutation frequency.
  • Some participants argue that while vaccines can reduce disease incidence, they are rarely 100% effective, citing the influenza vaccine as an example.
  • Questions arise regarding the historical context of HIV vaccine development, including references to previous candidates like the MVA-B vaccine.
  • Participants discuss the ethical implications of testing vaccine efficacy, particularly the challenges of conducting trials in high-risk populations without intentionally infecting individuals with HIV.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a mix of excitement and skepticism regarding the vaccine's potential. While there is agreement on the importance of further studies, there are multiple competing views on the implications of the Phase I results and the challenges of demonstrating efficacy.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the unclear relationship between T-cell responses and actual vaccine effectiveness in preventing HIV infection, as well as the ethical complexities involved in testing vaccine efficacy in human populations.

Pythagorean
Science Advisor
Messages
4,430
Reaction score
327
note: Phase I is just safety testing, not efficacy. Still exciting, though!

Sumagen Canada Inc and Western University announced today that the Phase I Clinical Trial (SAV CT 01) of the first and only preventative HIV vaccine based on a genetically modified killed whole virus (SAV001-H) has been successfully completed with no adverse effects in all patients. Antibody production was also boosted after vaccination.

http://communications.uwo.ca/media/...i_clinical_trial_of_sumagen_aids_vaccine.html
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Biology news on Phys.org
Let's just call it HIV vaccine, AIDS is the final stage of HIV infection.
How do they deal with the many strains of HIV and mutation frequency?
 
Monique said:
Let's just call it HIV vaccine, AIDS is the final stage of HIV infection.

Fixed.
 
Monique said:
Let's just call it HIV vaccine, AIDS is the final stage of HIV infection.
How do they deal with the many strains of HIV and mutation frequency?

Not sure, I haven't read it. The molecular biology would probably be over my head.
 
People are already stating that this is a medical breakthrough, while clearly a phase II study must still be conduced to show that the vaccine is effective.

I mean, there is a vaccine against the influenza virus, but it doesn't mean that no-one gets the flu anymore. Even people who are vaccinated can get sick.
 
Monique said:
I mean, there is a vaccine against the influenza virus, but it doesn't mean that no-one gets the flu anymore. Even people who are vaccinated can get sick.

Is any vaccine 100% effective? I don't think that's the expectation.

Anyway, this isn't the first HIV vaccine developed. I don't know what ever happened to the MVA-B vaccine that supposedly had a 90% success rate (and only at reducing HIV to a minor infection, not curing it) in initial trials.

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2011/09/29/new-vaccine-could-turn-hiv-into-minor-infection/
 
Pythagorean said:
Is any vaccine 100% effective? I don't think that's the expectation.
The press release states "Sumagen anticipates not only having the first HIV vaccine in market but also the eradication of HIV/AIDS for human beings."

Anyway, this isn't the first HIV vaccine developed. I don't know what ever happened to the MVA-B vaccine that supposedly had a 90% success rate (and only at reducing HIV to a minor infection, not curing it) in initial trials.
90% sounds surprisingly good, do you have a source for that?
 
  • #12
Borek said:

Ok so the 90% success rate is based on a positive T-cell response, that indeed is not surprising.

However, my question is about effectiveness of the vaccine for a person. Take the influenza vaccine as an example, it must also raise a good T-cell response, but only reduces the risk of a person to develop the flu by ~60% (since many strains of the virus exist). I wonder if HIV would be comparable.
 
  • #13
I wonder, how would you test efficacy anyway? You can't infect people with HIV intentionally and it's not going to cure people that already have it. So do you just dose up a high-risk population with the vaccine and wait and see if average number are lower ten years later or something?
 
  • #14
Another promising HIV vaccine from Oregon Health and Science University
http://www.gizmag.com/hiv-aids-vaccine-ohsu/29042/

A very promising vaccine candidate for HIV/AIDS has shown the ability to completely clear the simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV), a very aggressive form of HIV that leads to AIDS in monkeys. Developed at the Vaccine and Gene Therapy Institute at the Oregon Health and Science University (OHSU), the vaccine proved successful in about fifty percent of the subjects tested and could lead to a human vaccine preventing the onset of HIV/AIDS and even cure patients currently on anti-retroviral drugs.
 
  • #15
Pythagorean said:
I wonder, how would you test efficacy anyway? You can't infect people with HIV intentionally and it's not going to cure people that already have it. So do you just dose up a high-risk population with the vaccine and wait and see if average number are lower ten years later or something?

Basically, yes. Although you don't necessarily have to wait ten years to get useful data out of it. A lot of these studies are done in Africa where high risk populations are studied. It's an ethical minefield, honestly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K