You’re using a public version of DrugPatentWatch with 5 free searches available | Register to unlock more free searches. CREATE FREE ACCOUNT

Last Updated: May 23, 2024

CLINICAL TRIALS PROFILE FOR INMAZEB


✉ Email this page to a colleague

« Back to Dashboard


All Clinical Trials for INMAZEB

Trial ID Title Status Sponsor Phase Start Date Summary
NCT05202288 ↗ Pilot Study Evaluating the Impact of Delay Between Administration of Inmazeb Administration and Vaccination by Ervebo on Vaccine Immune Response on Healthy Volunteers Not yet recruiting Agence Nationale de Sécurité Sanitaire de Guinée (ANSS) Phase 2 2022-03-01 Ebola virus disease (EVD) is emerging regularly in various African countries for various reasons: during contact with mortal remains, during an unsafe burial or following the viral dissemination around a recovered patient. However, tools to fight the spread of the disease are being made available to countries affected by MVE. A vaccine (Ervebo), developed by the Merck laboratory, demonstrated its efficacy in protecting contacts and contacts of contacts in the "Ebola That's Enough" trial and two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with EVM: REGN-E3B and Mab114. The question of their use in post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), defined as the treatment of contacts at very high risk of contracting EVD, is essential. Vaccination with Ervebo alone does not appear to be a good option for PEP, particularly because antibody synthesis is delayed, and the vaccine is likely to be inactive for 10 days after administration. Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, seem to be a promising avenue in this indication because of their rapid action on the inhibition of virus entry into the cell. Moreover, Ervebo vaccine and monoclonal antibodies share the same viral target. It is therefore possible that the vaccine is inhibited by the monoclonal antibodies, particularly in the case of concomitant administration. However, no data on vaccine efficacy in combination are available. The question of the interaction between the monoclonal antibody and Ervebo and the delay between the administration of these two strategies remains unresolved. The hypothesis of this trial is that Ervebo vaccine efficacy is diminished with the concomitant administration of a monoclonal antibody, especially if this administration is close (short time between Mabs and vaccination). We hypothesize that with an optimal delay between Mabs and vaccination, the immunogenicity of the vaccine combined with monoclonal antibodies could be non-inferior to the vaccine alone, thus providing optimal short and long term protection. The primary objective of this study is to compare the vaccine immune response at 24 weeks induced by Ervebo administered on the same day (D0) or at S3, S6, or S12 of Inmazeb administration, in healthy volunteers, with vaccination with Ervebo alone. The trial will have 5 arms. The control arm (vaccination alone) will serve as a comparator of vaccine response in the intervention arms. The 4 intervention arms will assess the minimum time between Mab and vaccination.
NCT05202288 ↗ Pilot Study Evaluating the Impact of Delay Between Administration of Inmazeb Administration and Vaccination by Ervebo on Vaccine Immune Response on Healthy Volunteers Not yet recruiting Alliance for International Medical Action Phase 2 2022-03-01 Ebola virus disease (EVD) is emerging regularly in various African countries for various reasons: during contact with mortal remains, during an unsafe burial or following the viral dissemination around a recovered patient. However, tools to fight the spread of the disease are being made available to countries affected by MVE. A vaccine (Ervebo), developed by the Merck laboratory, demonstrated its efficacy in protecting contacts and contacts of contacts in the "Ebola That's Enough" trial and two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with EVM: REGN-E3B and Mab114. The question of their use in post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), defined as the treatment of contacts at very high risk of contracting EVD, is essential. Vaccination with Ervebo alone does not appear to be a good option for PEP, particularly because antibody synthesis is delayed, and the vaccine is likely to be inactive for 10 days after administration. Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, seem to be a promising avenue in this indication because of their rapid action on the inhibition of virus entry into the cell. Moreover, Ervebo vaccine and monoclonal antibodies share the same viral target. It is therefore possible that the vaccine is inhibited by the monoclonal antibodies, particularly in the case of concomitant administration. However, no data on vaccine efficacy in combination are available. The question of the interaction between the monoclonal antibody and Ervebo and the delay between the administration of these two strategies remains unresolved. The hypothesis of this trial is that Ervebo vaccine efficacy is diminished with the concomitant administration of a monoclonal antibody, especially if this administration is close (short time between Mabs and vaccination). We hypothesize that with an optimal delay between Mabs and vaccination, the immunogenicity of the vaccine combined with monoclonal antibodies could be non-inferior to the vaccine alone, thus providing optimal short and long term protection. The primary objective of this study is to compare the vaccine immune response at 24 weeks induced by Ervebo administered on the same day (D0) or at S3, S6, or S12 of Inmazeb administration, in healthy volunteers, with vaccination with Ervebo alone. The trial will have 5 arms. The control arm (vaccination alone) will serve as a comparator of vaccine response in the intervention arms. The 4 intervention arms will assess the minimum time between Mab and vaccination.
NCT05202288 ↗ Pilot Study Evaluating the Impact of Delay Between Administration of Inmazeb Administration and Vaccination by Ervebo on Vaccine Immune Response on Healthy Volunteers Not yet recruiting Clinical and Operational Research Alliance (CORAL) Phase 2 2022-03-01 Ebola virus disease (EVD) is emerging regularly in various African countries for various reasons: during contact with mortal remains, during an unsafe burial or following the viral dissemination around a recovered patient. However, tools to fight the spread of the disease are being made available to countries affected by MVE. A vaccine (Ervebo), developed by the Merck laboratory, demonstrated its efficacy in protecting contacts and contacts of contacts in the "Ebola That's Enough" trial and two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with EVM: REGN-E3B and Mab114. The question of their use in post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), defined as the treatment of contacts at very high risk of contracting EVD, is essential. Vaccination with Ervebo alone does not appear to be a good option for PEP, particularly because antibody synthesis is delayed, and the vaccine is likely to be inactive for 10 days after administration. Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, seem to be a promising avenue in this indication because of their rapid action on the inhibition of virus entry into the cell. Moreover, Ervebo vaccine and monoclonal antibodies share the same viral target. It is therefore possible that the vaccine is inhibited by the monoclonal antibodies, particularly in the case of concomitant administration. However, no data on vaccine efficacy in combination are available. The question of the interaction between the monoclonal antibody and Ervebo and the delay between the administration of these two strategies remains unresolved. The hypothesis of this trial is that Ervebo vaccine efficacy is diminished with the concomitant administration of a monoclonal antibody, especially if this administration is close (short time between Mabs and vaccination). We hypothesize that with an optimal delay between Mabs and vaccination, the immunogenicity of the vaccine combined with monoclonal antibodies could be non-inferior to the vaccine alone, thus providing optimal short and long term protection. The primary objective of this study is to compare the vaccine immune response at 24 weeks induced by Ervebo administered on the same day (D0) or at S3, S6, or S12 of Inmazeb administration, in healthy volunteers, with vaccination with Ervebo alone. The trial will have 5 arms. The control arm (vaccination alone) will serve as a comparator of vaccine response in the intervention arms. The 4 intervention arms will assess the minimum time between Mab and vaccination.
NCT05202288 ↗ Pilot Study Evaluating the Impact of Delay Between Administration of Inmazeb Administration and Vaccination by Ervebo on Vaccine Immune Response on Healthy Volunteers Not yet recruiting Institut National de la Santé Et de la Recherche Médicale, France Phase 2 2022-03-01 Ebola virus disease (EVD) is emerging regularly in various African countries for various reasons: during contact with mortal remains, during an unsafe burial or following the viral dissemination around a recovered patient. However, tools to fight the spread of the disease are being made available to countries affected by MVE. A vaccine (Ervebo), developed by the Merck laboratory, demonstrated its efficacy in protecting contacts and contacts of contacts in the "Ebola That's Enough" trial and two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with EVM: REGN-E3B and Mab114. The question of their use in post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), defined as the treatment of contacts at very high risk of contracting EVD, is essential. Vaccination with Ervebo alone does not appear to be a good option for PEP, particularly because antibody synthesis is delayed, and the vaccine is likely to be inactive for 10 days after administration. Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, seem to be a promising avenue in this indication because of their rapid action on the inhibition of virus entry into the cell. Moreover, Ervebo vaccine and monoclonal antibodies share the same viral target. It is therefore possible that the vaccine is inhibited by the monoclonal antibodies, particularly in the case of concomitant administration. However, no data on vaccine efficacy in combination are available. The question of the interaction between the monoclonal antibody and Ervebo and the delay between the administration of these two strategies remains unresolved. The hypothesis of this trial is that Ervebo vaccine efficacy is diminished with the concomitant administration of a monoclonal antibody, especially if this administration is close (short time between Mabs and vaccination). We hypothesize that with an optimal delay between Mabs and vaccination, the immunogenicity of the vaccine combined with monoclonal antibodies could be non-inferior to the vaccine alone, thus providing optimal short and long term protection. The primary objective of this study is to compare the vaccine immune response at 24 weeks induced by Ervebo administered on the same day (D0) or at S3, S6, or S12 of Inmazeb administration, in healthy volunteers, with vaccination with Ervebo alone. The trial will have 5 arms. The control arm (vaccination alone) will serve as a comparator of vaccine response in the intervention arms. The 4 intervention arms will assess the minimum time between Mab and vaccination.
NCT05202288 ↗ Pilot Study Evaluating the Impact of Delay Between Administration of Inmazeb Administration and Vaccination by Ervebo on Vaccine Immune Response on Healthy Volunteers Not yet recruiting Méthodologie et Evaluation pour la Recherche clinique et Epidémiologique sur le VIH en Afrique (MEREVA) Phase 2 2022-03-01 Ebola virus disease (EVD) is emerging regularly in various African countries for various reasons: during contact with mortal remains, during an unsafe burial or following the viral dissemination around a recovered patient. However, tools to fight the spread of the disease are being made available to countries affected by MVE. A vaccine (Ervebo), developed by the Merck laboratory, demonstrated its efficacy in protecting contacts and contacts of contacts in the "Ebola That's Enough" trial and two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with EVM: REGN-E3B and Mab114. The question of their use in post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), defined as the treatment of contacts at very high risk of contracting EVD, is essential. Vaccination with Ervebo alone does not appear to be a good option for PEP, particularly because antibody synthesis is delayed, and the vaccine is likely to be inactive for 10 days after administration. Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, seem to be a promising avenue in this indication because of their rapid action on the inhibition of virus entry into the cell. Moreover, Ervebo vaccine and monoclonal antibodies share the same viral target. It is therefore possible that the vaccine is inhibited by the monoclonal antibodies, particularly in the case of concomitant administration. However, no data on vaccine efficacy in combination are available. The question of the interaction between the monoclonal antibody and Ervebo and the delay between the administration of these two strategies remains unresolved. The hypothesis of this trial is that Ervebo vaccine efficacy is diminished with the concomitant administration of a monoclonal antibody, especially if this administration is close (short time between Mabs and vaccination). We hypothesize that with an optimal delay between Mabs and vaccination, the immunogenicity of the vaccine combined with monoclonal antibodies could be non-inferior to the vaccine alone, thus providing optimal short and long term protection. The primary objective of this study is to compare the vaccine immune response at 24 weeks induced by Ervebo administered on the same day (D0) or at S3, S6, or S12 of Inmazeb administration, in healthy volunteers, with vaccination with Ervebo alone. The trial will have 5 arms. The control arm (vaccination alone) will serve as a comparator of vaccine response in the intervention arms. The 4 intervention arms will assess the minimum time between Mab and vaccination.
NCT05202288 ↗ Pilot Study Evaluating the Impact of Delay Between Administration of Inmazeb Administration and Vaccination by Ervebo on Vaccine Immune Response on Healthy Volunteers Not yet recruiting Programme PAC-CI, Site ANRS-MIE de Côte d'Ivoire Phase 2 2022-03-01 Ebola virus disease (EVD) is emerging regularly in various African countries for various reasons: during contact with mortal remains, during an unsafe burial or following the viral dissemination around a recovered patient. However, tools to fight the spread of the disease are being made available to countries affected by MVE. A vaccine (Ervebo), developed by the Merck laboratory, demonstrated its efficacy in protecting contacts and contacts of contacts in the "Ebola That's Enough" trial and two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with EVM: REGN-E3B and Mab114. The question of their use in post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), defined as the treatment of contacts at very high risk of contracting EVD, is essential. Vaccination with Ervebo alone does not appear to be a good option for PEP, particularly because antibody synthesis is delayed, and the vaccine is likely to be inactive for 10 days after administration. Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, seem to be a promising avenue in this indication because of their rapid action on the inhibition of virus entry into the cell. Moreover, Ervebo vaccine and monoclonal antibodies share the same viral target. It is therefore possible that the vaccine is inhibited by the monoclonal antibodies, particularly in the case of concomitant administration. However, no data on vaccine efficacy in combination are available. The question of the interaction between the monoclonal antibody and Ervebo and the delay between the administration of these two strategies remains unresolved. The hypothesis of this trial is that Ervebo vaccine efficacy is diminished with the concomitant administration of a monoclonal antibody, especially if this administration is close (short time between Mabs and vaccination). We hypothesize that with an optimal delay between Mabs and vaccination, the immunogenicity of the vaccine combined with monoclonal antibodies could be non-inferior to the vaccine alone, thus providing optimal short and long term protection. The primary objective of this study is to compare the vaccine immune response at 24 weeks induced by Ervebo administered on the same day (D0) or at S3, S6, or S12 of Inmazeb administration, in healthy volunteers, with vaccination with Ervebo alone. The trial will have 5 arms. The control arm (vaccination alone) will serve as a comparator of vaccine response in the intervention arms. The 4 intervention arms will assess the minimum time between Mab and vaccination.
NCT05202288 ↗ Pilot Study Evaluating the Impact of Delay Between Administration of Inmazeb Administration and Vaccination by Ervebo on Vaccine Immune Response on Healthy Volunteers Not yet recruiting University of Bordeaux Phase 2 2022-03-01 Ebola virus disease (EVD) is emerging regularly in various African countries for various reasons: during contact with mortal remains, during an unsafe burial or following the viral dissemination around a recovered patient. However, tools to fight the spread of the disease are being made available to countries affected by MVE. A vaccine (Ervebo), developed by the Merck laboratory, demonstrated its efficacy in protecting contacts and contacts of contacts in the "Ebola That's Enough" trial and two monoclonal antibodies (Mabs) have demonstrated their efficacy in reducing mortality in patients with EVM: REGN-E3B and Mab114. The question of their use in post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP), defined as the treatment of contacts at very high risk of contracting EVD, is essential. Vaccination with Ervebo alone does not appear to be a good option for PEP, particularly because antibody synthesis is delayed, and the vaccine is likely to be inactive for 10 days after administration. Monoclonal antibodies, on the other hand, seem to be a promising avenue in this indication because of their rapid action on the inhibition of virus entry into the cell. Moreover, Ervebo vaccine and monoclonal antibodies share the same viral target. It is therefore possible that the vaccine is inhibited by the monoclonal antibodies, particularly in the case of concomitant administration. However, no data on vaccine efficacy in combination are available. The question of the interaction between the monoclonal antibody and Ervebo and the delay between the administration of these two strategies remains unresolved. The hypothesis of this trial is that Ervebo vaccine efficacy is diminished with the concomitant administration of a monoclonal antibody, especially if this administration is close (short time between Mabs and vaccination). We hypothesize that with an optimal delay between Mabs and vaccination, the immunogenicity of the vaccine combined with monoclonal antibodies could be non-inferior to the vaccine alone, thus providing optimal short and long term protection. The primary objective of this study is to compare the vaccine immune response at 24 weeks induced by Ervebo administered on the same day (D0) or at S3, S6, or S12 of Inmazeb administration, in healthy volunteers, with vaccination with Ervebo alone. The trial will have 5 arms. The control arm (vaccination alone) will serve as a comparator of vaccine response in the intervention arms. The 4 intervention arms will assess the minimum time between Mab and vaccination.
>Trial ID >Title >Status >Phase >Start Date >Summary

Clinical Trial Conditions for INMAZEB

Condition Name

Condition Name for INMAZEB
Intervention Trials
Ebola Virus Disease 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Condition MeSH

Condition MeSH for INMAZEB
Intervention Trials
Virus Diseases 1
Hemorrhagic Fever, Ebola 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Locations for INMAZEB

Trials by Country

Trials by Country for INMAZEB
Location Trials
Guinea 1
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Progress for INMAZEB

Clinical Trial Phase

Clinical Trial Phase for INMAZEB
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Phase 2 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Status

Clinical Trial Status for INMAZEB
Clinical Trial Phase Trials
Not yet recruiting 1
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Clinical Trial Sponsors for INMAZEB

Sponsor Name

Sponsor Name for INMAZEB
Sponsor Trials
Clinical and Operational Research Alliance (CORAL) 1
Institut National de la Santé Et de la Recherche Médicale, France 1
Méthodologie et Evaluation pour la Recherche clinique et Epidémiologique sur le VIH en Afrique (MEREVA) 1
[disabled in preview] 4
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Sponsor Type

Sponsor Type for INMAZEB
Sponsor Trials
Other 8
[disabled in preview] 0
This preview shows a limited data set
Subscribe for full access, or try a Trial

Make Better Decisions: Try a trial or see plans & pricing

Drugs may be covered by multiple patents or regulatory protections. All trademarks and applicant names are the property of their respective owners or licensors. Although great care is taken in the proper and correct provision of this service, thinkBiotech LLC does not accept any responsibility for possible consequences of errors or omissions in the provided data. The data presented herein is for information purposes only. There is no warranty that the data contained herein is error free. thinkBiotech performs no independent verification of facts as provided by public sources nor are attempts made to provide legal or investing advice. Any reliance on data provided herein is done solely at the discretion of the user. Users of this service are advised to seek professional advice and independent confirmation before considering acting on any of the provided information. thinkBiotech LLC reserves the right to amend, extend or withdraw any part or all of the offered service without notice.