Status: Finalised
First registered on:
28/02/2014
Last updated on:
05/07/2017
1. Study identification
EU PAS Register NumberEUPAS5937
Official titleA non-interventional, open observational non-inferiority study in two cluster-assigned cohorts of children aged 14 months into the safety of NeisVac-C® vaccines manufactured at two different production sites and given simultaneously with measles-mumps-rubella vaccine, assessed by web-based intensive monitoring
Study title acronymPeuterprik
Study typeObservational study
Brief description of the studyNon-interventional, open observational non-inferiority study with two cluster- assigned cohorts of toddlers (14 months old) who receive at vaccination centers NeisVac-C® vaccination with either
- “old” lots produced in Beltsville (group B), or
- “new” lots from Orth/Donau (group A), simultaneously with MMR vaccine. Clusters are assigned at the level of vaccination centers.
From 4 full days after the vaccines were administered, parents will receive web-based questionnaires with questions about any ADRs that occurred after vaccination.
Was this study requested by a regulator?Yes: EMA
Is the study required by a Risk Management Plan (RMP)?
EU RMP category 3 (required)
Regulatory procedure number (RMP Category 1 and 2 studies only)
Other study registration identification numbers and URLs as applicable
2. Research centres and Investigator details
Coordinating study entity
Department/Research group
Organisation/affiliationNetherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb
Details of (Primary) lead investigator
Title Dr
Last name van Puijenbroek
First name Eugene
Is this study being carried out with the collaboration of a research network?
No
Other centres where this study is being conducted
Not applicable (single centre)
Countries in which this study is being conducted
National study
Netherlands
3. Study timelines: initial administrative steps, progress reports and final report
PlannedActual
Date when funding contract was signed05/12/2013
Start date of data collection01/07/201401/07/2014
Start date of data analysis30/06/201631/05/2016
Date of interim report, if expected
Date of final study report30/09/201601/08/2016
4. Sources of funding
Please provide estimates of the percentage of funding by source for this study
Names(s)Approximate % funding
Pharmaceutical companiesPfizer Inc (formerly Baxter GmbH)100
Charities
Government body
Research councils
EU funding scheme
5. Contact details for enquiries
Scientific Enquiries
Title Dr
Last name Rumke
First name Hans C
Address line 1Goudsbloemvallei 7
Address line 2
Address line 3
City's-Hertogenbosch
Postcode5237MH
CountryNetherlands
Phone number (incl. country code)31-73-6469700
Alternative phone number
Fax number (incl. country code)
Public Enquiries
Title Dr
Last name van Puijenbroek
First name Eugene
Address line 1Goudsbloemvallei 7
Address line 2
Address line 3
City's-Hertogenbosch
Postcode5237MH
CountryNetherlands
Phone number (incl. country code)31-73-6469700
Alternative phone number
Fax number (incl. country code)31-73-6426136
6. Study drug(s) information
Product NameNeisVac-C
CountryAustria
Substance INN(s)MENINGOCOCCAL GROUP C CONJUGATE VACCINE (TETANUS TOXOID CONJUGATE)
7. Medical conditions to be studied
Medical condition(s)No
8. Population under study
Age
Infants and toddlers (28 days - 23 months)
Sex
Male
Female
9. Number of subjects
Estimated total number of subjects2430
Additional information
Two groups of at least 1215 will be recruited from a population of approximately 25.000 children. Because of lower than expected enrollment rates, spring 2015 it was decided to extend the regions of recruitment and to prolong the recruitment period.
10. Source of data
Is this study being carried out with an established data source?No
Sources of data
Administrative database, e.g. claims database
11. Scope of the study
What is the scope of the study?
Risk assessment
post authorisation safety study
Primary scope : post authorisation safety study
12. Main objective(s)
What is the main objective of the study?
to compare the proportions of vaccinees with fever of ≥38ºC within 4 days after injections of the Baxter NeisVac-C® vaccine bulk material produced in Orth/Donau (new, group A) or NeisVac-C® vaccine of which the bulk material was produced in Beltsville (old, group B), and simultaneous MMR vaccine for both groups of NeisVac-C® recipients
Are there primary outcomes?Yes
Proportions of children with fever (rectally measured body temperature of ≥38.0°C) within 4 days after vaccination with NeisVac-C® and MMR.
Are there secondary outcomes?Yes
Proportions of children with solicited other systemic and local reactions within 4 days after vaccination with NeisVac C® and MMR.
13. Study design
What is the design of the study?
Intensive monitoring schemes
Cohort study
14. Follow-up of patients
Will patients be followed up?Yes
Please describe duration of follow up
From 4 full days after the vaccines were administered, parents will receive web-based questionnaires with questions about any ADRs that occurred after vaccination.
The 1st questionnaire is sent at day 5 and covers days 1, 2, 3 and 4.
The 2nd questionnaire will be sent after two weeks and covers days 5 to 14.
The 3rd questionnaire will be sent after four weeks and covers days 15 to 28.
15. Data analysis plan
Please provide a brief summary of the analysis method
The primary endpoint of the study, fever cases observed within 4 days after vaccination will be analyzed using logistic regression with vaccination groups (“old” / “new” product) and potential confounders as listed in 5.3 as explanatory factors, applying a log link in order to obtain relative risk estimates at the end. Relative risk and its 95% CI of occurrence of fever cases with the “new” and “old” NeisVac-C® product will be calculated from the regression model assessing a potential increase of fever reactions with the “new” product. If the upper limit of the 95% CI is below 1.5 then the “new” product is considered to be non-inferior to the old one as far as fever reaction is concerned.
The secondary endpoints will be analyzed similarly and descriptive without the non-inferiority considerations.
16. ENCePP seal
Are you requesting the ENCePP seal for this study?
Yes
17. Full protocol
18. Study Results
Please list the 5 most relevant publications using data from your study
ReferenceLink to web-publication
None
19. Other relevant documents
Other documents
DescriptionDocumentLatest version
Signed Code of
Conduct Checklist
Submitted
Signed Code of Conduct Declaration
Submitted
Signed Checklist for Study
Protocols
Submitted
