Explore the vast range of titles available.

The Zika virus epidemic and associated congenital infections have prompted rapid vaccine development. We assessed two new DNA vaccines expressing premembrane and envelope Zika virus structural proteins. We did two phase 1, randomised, open-label trials involving healthy adult volunteers. The VRC 319 trial, done in three centres, assessed plasmid VRC5288 (Zika virus and Japanese encephalitis virus chimera), and the VRC 320, done in one centre, assessed plasmid VRC5283 (wild-type Zika virus). Eligible participants were aged 18–35 years in VRC19 and 18–50 years in VRC 320. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 by a computer-generated randomisation schedule prepared by the study statistician. All participants received intramuscular injection of 4 mg vaccine. In VRC 319 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations via needle and syringe at 0 and 8 weeks, 0 and 12 weeks, 0, 4, and 8 weeks, or 0, 4, and 20 weeks. In VRC 320 participants were assigned to receive vaccinations at 0, 4, and 8 weeks via single-dose needle and syringe injection in one deltoid or split-dose needle and syringe or needle-free injection with the Stratis device (Pharmajet, Golden, CO, USA) in each deltoid. Both trials followed up volunteers for 24 months for the primary endpoint of safety, assessed as local and systemic reactogenicity in the 7 days after each vaccination and all adverse events in the 28 days after each vaccination. The secondary endpoint in both trials was immunogenicity 4 weeks after last vaccination. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02840487 and NCT02996461. VRC 319 enrolled 80 participants (20 in each group), and VRC 320 enrolled 45 participants (15 in each group). One participant in VRC 319 and two in VRC 320 withdrew after one dose of vaccine, but were included in the safety analyses. Both vaccines were safe and well tolerated. All local and systemic symptoms were mild to moderate. In both studies, pain and tenderness at the injection site was the most frequent local symptoms (37 [46%] of 80 participants in VRC 319 and 36 [80%] of 45 in VRC 320) and malaise and headache were the most frequent systemic symptoms (22 [27%] and 18 [22%], respectively, in VRC 319 and 17 [38%] and 15 [33%], respectively, in VRC 320). For VRC5283, 14 of 14 (100%) participants who received split-dose vaccinations by needle-free injection had detectable positive antibody responses, and the geometric mean titre of 304 was the highest across all groups in both trials. VRC5283 was well tolerated and has advanced to phase 2 efficacy testing. Intramural Research Program of the Vaccine Research Center, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, National Institutes of Health.

The Ebola epidemics in west Africa and the Democratic Republic of the Congo highlight an urgent need for safe and effective vaccines to prevent Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and long-term immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vector-based vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in Sierra Leone, a country previously affected by Ebola. The trial comprised two stages: an open-label, non-randomised stage 1, and a randomised, double-blind, controlled stage 2. The study was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. In stage 1, healthy adults (aged ≥18 years) residing in or near Kambia district, received an intramuscular injection of Ad26.ZEBOV (5 × 1010 viral particles) on day 1 (first dose) followed by an intramuscular injection of MVA-BN-Filo (1 × 108 infectious units) on day 57 (second dose). An Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination was offered at 2 years after the first dose to stage 1 participants. The eligibility criteria for adult participants in stage 2 were consistent with stage 1 eligibility criteria. Stage 2 participants were randomly assigned (3:1), by computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight) via an interactive web-response system, to receive either the Ebola vaccine regimen (Ad26.ZEBOV followed by MVA-BN-Filo) or an intramuscular injection of a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo on day 57 (second dose; control group). Study team personnel, except those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation, and participants were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was the safety of the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen, which was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine. Safety was assessed as solicited local and systemic adverse events occurring in the first 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited adverse events occurring in the first 28 days after each vaccination, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events occurring up to each participant's last study visit. Secondary outcomes were to assess Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second vaccine in a per-protocol set of participants (ie, those who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response) and to assess the safety and tolerability of the Ad26.ZEBOV booster vaccination in stage 1 participants who had received the booster dose. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. Between Sept 30, 2015, and Oct 19, 2016, 443 participants (43 in stage 1 and 400 in stage 2) were enrolled; 341 participants assigned to receive the Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo regimen and 102 participants assigned to receive the MenACWY and placebo regimen received at least one dose of study vaccine. Both regimens were well tolerated with no safety concerns. In stage 1, solicited local adverse events (mostly mild or moderate injection-site pain) were reported in 12 (28%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in six (14%) participants after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited local adverse events were reported in 51 (17%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 58 (24%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 17 (17%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in eight (9%) of 86 after placebo injection. In stage 1, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 18 (42%) of 43 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination and in 17 (40%) after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination. In stage 2, solicited systemic adverse events were reported in 161 (54%) of 298 participants after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination, in 107 (43%) of 246 after MVA-BN-Filo vaccination, in 51 (50%) of 102 after MenACWY vaccination, and in 39 (45%) of 86 after placebo injection. Solicited systemic adverse events in both stage 1 and 2 participants included mostly mild or moderate headache, myalgia, fatigue, and arthralgia. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first dose was headache in stage 1 and malaria in stage 2. Malaria was the most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the second dose in both stage 1 and 2. No serious adverse event was considered related to the study vaccine, and no immediate reportable events were observed. In stage 1, the safety profile after the booster vaccination was not notably different to that observed after the first dose. Vaccine-induced humoral immune responses were observed in 41 (98%) of 42 stage 1 participants (geometric mean binding antibody concentration 4784 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 3736–6125]) and in 176 (98%) of 179 stage 2 participants (3810 EU/mL [3312–4383]) at 21 days after the second vaccination. The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo vaccine regimen was well tolerated and immunogenic, with persistent humoral immune responses. These data support the use of this vaccine regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in adults. Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking and Janssen Vaccines & Prevention BV.

Children account for a substantial proportion of cases and deaths from Ebola virus disease. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of a two-dose heterologous vaccine regimen, comprising the adenovirus type 26 vector-based vaccine encoding the Ebola virus glycoprotein (Ad26.ZEBOV) and the modified vaccinia Ankara vector-based vaccine, encoding glycoproteins from the Ebola virus, Sudan virus, and Marburg virus, and the nucleoprotein from the Tai Forest virus (MVA-BN-Filo), in a paediatric population in Sierra Leone. This randomised, double-blind, controlled trial was done at three clinics in Kambia district, Sierra Leone. Healthy children and adolescents aged 1–17 years were enrolled in three age cohorts (12–17 years, 4–11 years, and 1–3 years) and randomly assigned (3:1), via computer-generated block randomisation (block size of eight), to receive an intramuscular injection of either Ad26.ZEBOV (5 × 1010 viral particles; first dose) followed by MVA-BN-Filo (1 × 108 infectious units; second dose) on day 57 (Ebola vaccine group), or a single dose of meningococcal quadrivalent (serogroups A, C, W135, and Y) conjugate vaccine (MenACWY; first dose) followed by placebo (second dose) on day 57 (control group). Study team personnel (except for those with primary responsibility for study vaccine preparation), participants, and their parents or guardians were masked to study vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was safety, measured as the occurrence of solicited local and systemic adverse symptoms during 7 days after each vaccination, unsolicited systemic adverse events during 28 days after each vaccination, abnormal laboratory results during the study period, and serious adverse events or immediate reportable events throughout the study period. The secondary outcome was immunogenicity (humoral immune response), measured as the concentration of Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibodies at 21 days after the second dose. The primary outcome was assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose of study vaccine and had available reactogenicity data, and immunogenicity was assessed in all participants who had received both vaccinations within the protocol-defined time window, had at least one evaluable post-vaccination sample, and had no major protocol deviations that could have influenced the immune response. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02509494. From April 4, 2017, to July 5, 2018, 576 eligible children or adolescents (192 in each of the three age cohorts) were enrolled and randomly assigned. The most common solicited local adverse event during the 7 days after the first and second dose was injection-site pain in all age groups, with frequencies ranging from 0% (none of 48) of children aged 1–3 years after placebo injection to 21% (30 of 144) of children aged 4–11 years after Ad26.ZEBOV vaccination. The most frequently observed solicited systemic adverse event during the 7 days was headache in the 12–17 years and 4–11 years age cohorts after the first and second dose, and pyrexia in the 1–3 years age cohort after the first and second dose. The most frequent unsolicited adverse event after the first and second dose vaccinations was malaria in all age cohorts, irrespective of the vaccine types. Following vaccination with MenACWY, severe thrombocytopaenia was observed in one participant aged 3 years. No other clinically significant laboratory abnormalities were observed in other study participants, and no serious adverse events related to the Ebola vaccine regimen were reported. There were no treatment-related deaths. Ebola virus glycoprotein-specific binding antibody responses at 21 days after the second dose of the Ebola virus vaccine regimen were observed in 131 (98%) of 134 children aged 12–17 years (9929 ELISA units [EU]/mL [95% CI 8172–12 064]), in 119 (99%) of 120 aged 4–11 years (10 212 EU/mL [8419–12 388]), and in 118 (98%) of 121 aged 1–3 years (22 568 EU/mL [18 426–27 642]). The Ad26.ZEBOV and MVA-BN-Filo Ebola vaccine regimen was well tolerated with no safety concerns in children aged 1–17 years, and induced robust humoral immune responses, suggesting suitability of this regimen for Ebola virus disease prophylaxis in children. Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking and Janssen Vaccines & Prevention BV.

We evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of (i) an intradermal HIV-DNA regimen given with/without intradermal electroporation (EP) as prime and (ii) the impact of boosting with modified vaccinia virus Ankara (HIV-MVA) administered with or without subtype C CN54rgp140 envelope protein adjuvanted with Glucopyranosyl Lipid A (GLA-AF) in volunteers from Tanzania and Mozambique. Healthy HIV-uninfected adults (N = 191) were randomized twice; first to one of three HIV-DNA intradermal priming regimens by needle-free ZetaJet device at weeks 0, 4 and 12 (Group I: 2x0.1mL [3mg/mL], Group II: 2x0.1mL [3mg/mL] plus EP, Group III: 1x0.1mL [6mg/mL] plus EP). Second the same volunteers received 108 pfu HIV-MVA twice, alone or combined with CN54rgp140/GLA-AF, intramuscularly by syringe, 16 weeks apart. Additionally, 20 volunteers received saline placebo. Vaccinations and electroporation did not raise safety concerns. After the last vaccination, the overall IFN-γ ELISpot response rate to either Gag or Env was 97%. Intradermal electroporation significantly increased ELISpot response rates to HIV-DNA-specific Gag (66% group I vs. 86% group II, p = 0.026), but not to the HIV-MVA vaccine-specific Gag or Env peptide pools nor the magnitude of responses. Co-administration of rgp140/GLA-AF with HIV-MVA did not impact the frequency of binding antibody responses against subtype B gp160, C gp140 or E gp120 antigens (95%, 99%, 79%, respectively), but significantly enhanced the magnitude against subtype B gp160 (2700 versus 300, p<0.001) and subtype C gp140 (24300 versus 2700, p<0.001) Env protein. At relatively low titers, neutralizing antibody responses using the TZM-bl assay were more frequent in vaccinees given adjuvanted protein boost. Intradermal electroporation increased DNA-induced Gag response rates but did not show an impact on Env-specific responses nor on the magnitude of responses. Co-administration of HIV-MVA with rgp140/GLA-AF significantly enhanced antibody responses.

Despite preventive vaccines for oncogenic human papillomaviruses (HPVs), cervical intraepithelial neoplasia (CIN) is common, and current treatments are ablative and can lead to long-term reproductive morbidity. We assessed whether VGX-3100, synthetic plasmids targeting HPV-16 and HPV-18 E6 and E7 proteins, delivered by electroporation, would cause histopathological regression in women with CIN2/3. Efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of VGX-3100 were assessed in CIN2/3 associated with HPV-16 and HPV-18, in a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2b study. Patients from 36 academic and private gynaecology practices in seven countries were randomised (3:1) to receive 6 mg VGX-3100 or placebo (1 mL), given intramuscularly at 0, 4, and 12 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by age (<25 vs ≥25 years) and CIN2 versus CIN3 by computer-generated allocation sequence (block size 4). Funder and site personnel, participants, and pathologists were masked to treatment. The primary efficacy endpoint was regression to CIN1 or normal pathology 36 weeks after the first dose. Per-protocol and modified intention-to-treat analyses were based on patients receiving three doses without protocol violations, and on patients receiving at least one dose, respectively. The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT01304524) and EudraCT (number 2012-001334-33). Between Oct 19, 2011, and July 30, 2013, 167 patients received either VGX-3100 (n=125) or placebo (n=42). In the per-protocol analysis 53 (49·5%) of 107 VGX-3100 recipients and 11 (30·6%) of 36 placebo recipients had histopathological regression (percentage point difference 19·0 [95% CI 1·4–36·6]; p=0·034). In the modified intention-to-treat analysis 55 (48·2%) of 114 VGX-3100 recipients and 12 (30·0%) of 40 placebo recipients had histopathological regression (percentage point difference 18·2 [95% CI 1·3–34·4]; p=0·034). Injection-site reactions occurred in most patients, but only erythema was significantly more common in the VGX-3100 group (98/125, 78·4%) than in the placebo group (24/42, 57·1%; percentage point difference 21·3 [95% CI 5·3–37·8]; p=0·007). VGX-3100 is the first therapeutic vaccine to show efficacy against CIN2/3 associated with HPV-16 and HPV-18. VGX-3100 could present a non-surgical therapeutic option for CIN2/3, changing the treatment outlook for this common disease. Inovio Pharmaceuticals.

Gene-based vaccination using prime/boost regimens protects animals and humans against malaria, inducing cell-mediated responses that in animal models target liver stage malaria parasites. We tested a DNA prime/adenovirus boost malaria vaccine in a Phase 1 clinical trial with controlled human malaria infection. The vaccine regimen was three monthly doses of two DNA plasmids (DNA) followed four months later by a single boost with two non-replicating human serotype 5 adenovirus vectors (Ad). The constructs encoded genes expressing P. falciparum circumsporozoite protein (CSP) and apical membrane antigen-1 (AMA1). The regimen was safe and well-tolerated, with mostly mild adverse events that occurred at the site of injection. Only one AE (diarrhea), possibly related to immunization, was severe (Grade 3), preventing daily activities. Four weeks after the Ad boost, 15 study subjects were challenged with P. falciparum sporozoites by mosquito bite, and four (27%) were sterilely protected. Antibody responses by ELISA rose after Ad boost but were low (CSP geometric mean titer 210, range 44-817; AMA1 geometric mean micrograms/milliliter 11.9, range 1.5-102) and were not associated with protection. Ex vivo IFN-γ ELISpot responses after Ad boost were modest (CSP geometric mean spot forming cells/million peripheral blood mononuclear cells 86, range 13-408; AMA1 348, range 88-1270) and were highest in three protected subjects. ELISpot responses to AMA1 were significantly associated with protection (p = 0.019). Flow cytometry identified predominant IFN-γ mono-secreting CD8+ T cell responses in three protected subjects. No subjects with high pre-existing anti-Ad5 neutralizing antibodies were protected but the association was not statistically significant. The DNA/Ad regimen provided the highest sterile immunity achieved against malaria following immunization with a gene-based subunit vaccine (27%). Protection was associated with cell-mediated immunity to AMA1, with CSP probably contributing. Substituting a low seroprevalence vector for Ad5 and supplementing CSP/AMA1 with additional antigens may improve protection. ClinicalTrials.govNCT00870987.

In an efficacy trial, 2504 persons at high risk for HIV-1 acquisition received either a DNA prime–recombinant adenovirus type 5 boost (DNA/rAd5) vaccine or placebo. The vaccine regimen did not reduce either HIV-1 acquisition or viral load. The epidemic infection caused by the human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) is now in its fourth decade, with an estimated 2.5 million new infections occurring annually worldwide. 1 The number of newly infected persons, although diminishing, outpaces the number of patients who initiate antiretroviral therapy. Despite a number of successful prevention interventions that have been reported, including preexposure prophylaxis and treatment as prevention, 2 – 9 ultimate control of the HIV epidemic will most likely come only with the development of a safe and effective preventive vaccine. This goal has proved to be elusive. Of the efficacy trials of HIV vaccines that . . .

► A phase I/II HIV vaccine trial has been conducted in Tanzania employing priming with HIV-1 DNA and boosting HIV-1 MVA. ► It has demonstrated excellent safety and immunogenicity by eliciting cell-mediated as well as antibody responses to Env. ► The superiority of low dose intradermal over high dose intramuscular HIV-DNA vaccination has been found. ► The capacity built paves the way for further HIV vaccine trials in Tanzania by collaboration between the North and South. We conducted a phase I/II randomized placebo-controlled trial with the aim of exploring whether priming with a low intradermal dose of a multiclade, multigene HIV-1 DNA vaccine could improve the immunogenicity of the same vaccine given intramuscularly prior to boosting with a heterologous HIV-1 MVA among healthy adults in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. Sixty HIV-uninfected volunteers were randomized to receive DNA plasmid vaccine 1mg intradermally (id), n=20, or 3.8mg intramuscularly (im), n=20, or placebo, n=20, using a needle-free injection device. DNA plasmids encoding HIV-1 genes gp160 subtype A, B, C; rev B; p17/p24 gag A, B and Rtmut B were given at weeks 0, 4 and 12. Recombinant MVA (108pfu) expressing HIV-1 Env, Gag, Pol of CRF01_AE or placebo was administered im at month 9 and 21. The vaccines were well tolerated. Two weeks after the third HIV-DNA injection, 22/38 (58%) vaccinees had IFN-γ ELISpot responses to Gag. Two weeks after the first HIV-MVA boost all 35 (100%) vaccinees responded to Gag and 31 (89%) to Env. Two to four weeks after the second HIV-MVA boost, 28/29 (97%) vaccinees had IFN-γ ELISpot responses, 27 (93%) to Gag and 23 (79%) to Env. The id-primed recipients had significantly higher responses to Env than im recipients. Intracellular cytokine staining for Gag-specific IFN-γ/IL-2 production showed both CD8+ and CD4+ T cell responses. All vaccinees had HIV-specific lymphoproliferative responses. All vaccinees reacted in diagnostic HIV serological tests and 26/29 (90%) had antibodies against gp160 after the second HIV-MVA boost. Furthermore, while all of 29 vaccinee sera were negative for neutralizing antibodies against clade B, C and CRF01_AE pseudoviruses in the TZM-bl neutralization assay, in a PBMC assay, the response rate ranged from 31% to 83% positives, depending upon the clade B or CRF01_AE virus tested. This vaccine approach is safe and highly immunogenic. Low dose, id HIV-DNA priming elicited higher and broader cell-mediated immune responses to Env after HIV-MVA boost compared to a higher HIV-DNA priming dose given im. Three HIV-DNA priming immunizations followed by two HIV-MVA boosts efficiently induced Env-antibody responses.

Background A two-dose primary regimen of INO-4800 DNA vaccine demonstrated only modest immunogenicity in the previous phase 2 clinical trial. This booster study aimed to evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of a booster dose of INO-4800 in adults previously received two-dose regimen of INO-4800. Methods Healthy adults who received two doses of INO-4800 (1.0 mg or 2.0 mg) at least 12 months ago in a previous phase 2 trial were eligible for this booster study, conducted in Danyang, Jiangsu Province, China. Eligible participants were stratified by primary vaccination dose (1.0 mg or 2.0 mg) and age group (18–59 years or ≥ 60 years), and subsequently randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive a third dose of INO-4800 or placebo at the same dosage as previously administered. The primary immunogenicity endpoint was the geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) of spike-binding antibodies on day 14 post-booster. The primary safety endpoint was the occurrence of adverse reactions within 14 days. Results Between December 20 and 23, 2021, 200 eligible participants were enrolled. 100 eligible participants who received two doses of 2.0 mg INO-4800 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a third dose of 2.0 mg INO-4800 ( n  = 50) or 2.0 mg placebo ( n  = 50). Another 100 eligible participants who received two doses of 1.0 mg INO-4800 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a third dose of 1.0 mg INO-4800 ( n  = 50) or 1.0 mg placebo ( n  = 50). On day 14 post-booster, the GMCs of spike-binding antibodies were significantly higher in 2.0 mg INO-4800 group ( 260.1 BAU/mL) compared to placebo group (2.8 BAU/mL, p  < 0.001), and in 1.0 mg INO-4800 group (104.2 BAU/mL) compared to placebo group (2.5 BAU/mL, p  < 0.001). The most common local reactions were injection site redness, occurring at rate of 16.0% in the INO-4800 groups.All adverse reactions were mild to moderate in severity and occurred within 14 days post-booster. No vaccine related serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions The booster regimen of one dose INO-4800 is safe and modestly immunogenic in individuals who previously received a two- dose regimen of INO-4800, with the 2.0 mg INO-4800 demonstrating superior immunogenicity compared to the 1.0 mg INO-4800. Trial registration www.chictr.org.cn , identifier is ChiCTR2100054324.(December 13 2021).

Seasonal influenza results in significant morbidity and mortality worldwide, but the currently licensed inactivated vaccines generally have low vaccine efficacies and could be improved. In this phase 1 clinical trial, we compared seasonal influenza vaccine regimens with different priming strategies, prime-boost intervals, and administration routes to determine the impact of these variables on the resulting antibody response. Between August 17, 2012 and January 25, 2013, four sites enrolled healthy adults 18-70 years of age. Subjects were randomized to receive one of the following vaccination regimens: trivalent hemagglutinin (HA) DNA prime followed by trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV3) boost with a 3.5 month interval (DNA-IIV3), IIV3 prime followed by IIV3 boost with a 10 month interval (IIV3-IIV3), or concurrent DNA and IIV3 prime followed by IIV3 boost with a 10 month interval (DNA/IIV3-IIV3). Each regimen was additionally stratified by an IIV3 administration route of either intramuscular (IM) or intradermal (ID). DNA vaccines were administered by a needle-free jet injector (Biojector). Study objectives included evaluating the safety and tolerability of each regimen and measuring the antibody response by hemagglutination inhibition (HAI). Three hundred and sixteen subjects enrolled. Local reactogenicity was mild to moderate in severity, with higher frequencies recorded following DNA vaccine administered by Biojector compared to IIV3 by either route (p <0.02 for pain, swelling, and redness) and following IIV3 by ID route compared to IM route (p <0.001 for swelling and redness). Systemic reactogenicity was similar between regimens. Though no overall differences were observed between regimens, the highest titers post boost were observed in the DNA-IIV3 group by ID route and in the IIV3-IIV3 group by IM route. All vaccination regimens were found to be safe and tolerable. While there were no overall differences between regimens, the DNA-IIV3 group by ID route, and the IIV3-IIV3 group by IM route, showed higher responses compared to the other same-route regimens.