Case Report: Two cases of apparent discordance between non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) and amniocentesis resulting in feto-placental mosaicism of trisomy 21. Issues in diagnosis, investigation and counselling

The sequencing of cell-free fetal DNA in the maternal plasma through non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) is an accurate genetic screening test to detect the most common fetal aneuploidies during pregnancy. The extensive use of NIPT, as a screening method, has highlighted the limits of the technique, including false positive and negative results. Feto-placental mosaicism is a challenging biological issue and is the most frequent cause of false positive and negative results in NIPT screening, and of discrepancy between NIPT and invasive test results. We are reporting on two cases of feto-placental mosaicism of trisomy 21, both with a low-risk NIPT result, identified by ultrasound signs and a subsequent amniocentesis consistent with a trisomy 21. In both cases, after the pregnancy termination, cytogenetic and/or cytogenomic analyses were performed on the placenta and fetal tissues, showing in the first case a mosaicism of trisomy 21 in both the placenta and the fetus, but a mosaicism in the placenta and a complete trisomy 21 in the fetus in the second case. These cases emphasize the need for accurate and complete pre-test NIPT counselling, as well as to identify situations at risk for a possible false negative NIPT result, which may underestimate a potential pathological condition, such as feto-placental mosaicism or fetal trisomy. Post-mortem molecular autopsy may discriminate between placental, fetal and feto-placental mosaicism, and between complete or mosaic fetal chromosomal anomalies. A multidisciplinary approach in counselling, as well as in the interpretation of biological events, is essential for the clarification of complex cases, such as feto-placental mosaicisms

Design of a phase III multicenter trial to evaluate the efficacy of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in children across diverse transmission settings in Africa

BACKGROUND\ud \ud GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals and the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative are working in partnership to develop a malaria vaccine to protect infants and children living in malaria endemic regions of sub-Saharan Africa, which can be delivered through the Expanded Programme on Immunization. The RTS,S/AS candidate vaccine has been evaluated in multiple phase I/II studies and shown to have a favourable safety profile and to be well-tolerated in both adults and children. This paper details the design of the phase III multicentre efficacy trial of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine candidate, which is pivotal for licensure and policy decision-making.\ud \ud METHODS\ud \ud The phase III trial is a randomized, controlled, multicentre, participant- and observer-blind study on-going in 11 centres associated with different malaria transmission settings in seven countries in sub-Saharan Africa. A minimum of 6,000 children in each of two age categories (6-12 weeks, 5-17 months) have been enrolled. Children were randomized 1:1:1 to one of three study groups: (1) primary vaccination with RTS,S/AS01 and booster dose of RTS,S/AS01; (2) primary vaccination with RTS,S/AS01 and a control vaccine at time of booster; (3) primary vaccination with control vaccine and a control vaccine at time of booster. Primary vaccination comprises three doses at monthly intervals; the booster dose is administered at 18 months post-primary course. Subjects will be followed to study month 32. The co-primary objectives are the evaluation of efficacy over one year post-dose 3 against clinical malaria when primary immunization is delivered at: (1) 6-12 weeks of age, with co-administration of DTPwHepB/Hib antigens and OPV; (2) 5-17 months of age. Secondary objectives include evaluation of vaccine efficacy against severe malaria, anaemia, malaria hospitalization, fatal malaria, all-cause mortality and other serious illnesses including sepsis and pneumonia. Efficacy of the vaccine against clinical malaria under different transmission settings, the evolution of efficacy over time and the potential benefit of a booster will be evaluated. In addition, the effect of RTS,S/AS01 vaccination on growth, and the safety and immunogenicity in HIV-infected and malnourished children will be assessed. Safety of the primary course of immunization and the booster dose will be documented in both age categories.\ud \ud CONCLUSIONS\ud \ud This pivotal phase III study of the RTS,S/AS01 candidate malaria vaccine in African children was designed and implemented by the Clinical Trials Partnership Committee. The study will provide efficacy and safety data to fulfil regulatory requirements, together with data on a broad range of endpoints that will facilitate the evaluation of the public health impact of the vaccine and will aid policy and implementation decisions.\ud \ud TRIAL REGISTRATION\ud \ud Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00866619

Circumsporozoite-specific T cell responses in children vaccinated with RTS,S/AS01 E and protection against P falciparum clinical malaria

Background:RTS,S/AS01E is the lead candidate pre-erythrocytic malaria vaccine. In Phase IIb field trials the safety profile was acceptable and the efficacy was 53% (95%CI 31%–72%) for protecting children against clinical malaria caused by P. falciparum. We studied CS-specific T cell responses in order to identify correlates of protection.Methods and Findings:We used intracellular cytokine staining (for IL2, IFNγ, and TNFα), ex-vivo ELISPOTs (IFNγ and IL2) and IFNγ cultured ELISPOT assays to characterize the CS-specific cellular responses in 407 children (5–17 months of age) in a phase IIb randomized controlled trial of RTS,S/AS01E (NCT00380393). RTS,S/ AS01E vaccinees had higher frequencies of CS-specific CD4+ T cells producing IFNγ, TNFα or IL2 compared to control vaccinees. In a multivariable analysis TNFα+ CD4+ T cells were independently associated with a reduced risk for clinical malaria among RTS,S/AS01E vaccinees (HR = 0.64, 95%CI 0.49–0.86, p = 0.002). There was a non-significant tendency towards reduced risk among control vaccinees (HR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.62–1.03, p = 0.084), albeit with lower CS-specific T cell frequencies and higher rates of clinical malaria. When data from both RTS,S/AS01E vaccinees and control vaccinees were combined (with adjusting for vaccination group), the HR was 0.74 (95%CI 0.62–0.89, p = 0.001). After a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (n-18), the finding was still significant at p = 0.018. There was no significant correlation between cultured or ex vivo ELISPOT data and protection from clinical malaria. The combination of TNFα+ CD4+ T cells and anti-CS antibody statistically accounted for the protective effect of vaccination in a Cox regression model.Conclusions:RTS,S/AS01E induces CS-specific Th1 T cell responses in young children living in a malaria endemic area. The combination of anti-CS antibody concentrations titers and CS-specific TNFα+ CD4+ T cells could account for the level of protection conferred by RTS,S/AS01E. The correlation between CS-specific TNFα+ CD4+ T cells and protection needs confirmation in other datasets

Development of standardized laboratory methods and quality processes for a phase III study of the RTS, S/AS01 candidate malaria vaccine

BACKGROUND\ud \ud A pivotal phase III study of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria candidate vaccine is ongoing in several research centres across Africa. The development and establishment of quality systems was a requirement for trial conduct to meet international regulatory standards, as well as providing an important capacity strengthening opportunity for study centres.\ud \ud METHODS\ud \ud Standardized laboratory methods and quality assurance processes were implemented at each of the study centres, facilitated by funding partners.\ud \ud RESULTS\ud \ud A robust protocol for determination of parasite density based on actual blood cell counts was set up in accordance with World Health Organization recommendations. Automated equipment including haematology and biochemistry analyzers were put in place with standard methods for bedside testing of glycaemia, base excess and lactacidaemia. Facilities for X-rays and basic microbiology testing were also provided or upgraded alongside health care infrastructure in some centres. External quality assurance assessment of all major laboratory methods was established and method qualification by each laboratory demonstrated. The resulting capacity strengthening has ensured laboratory evaluations are conducted locally to the high standards required in clinical trials.\ud \ud CONCLUSION\ud \ud Major efforts by study centres, together with support from collaborating parties, have allowed standardized methods and robust quality assurance processes to be put in place for the phase III evaluation of the RTS, S/AS01 malaria candidate vaccine. Extensive training programmes, coupled with continuous commitment from research centre staff, have been the key elements behind the successful implementation of quality processes. It is expected these activities will culminate in healthcare benefits for the subjects and communities participating in these trials.\ud \ud TRIAL REGISTRATION\ud \ud Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00866619

Efficacy of RTS,S/AS01E vaccine against malaria in children 5 to 17 months of age.

BACKGROUND: Plasmodium falciparum malaria is a pressing global health problem. A previous study of the malaria vaccine RTS,S (which targets the circumsporozoite protein), given with an adjuvant system (AS02A), showed a 30% rate of protection against clinical malaria in children 1 to 4 years of age. We evaluated the efficacy of RTS,S given with a more immunogenic adjuvant system (AS01E) in children 5 to 17 months of age, a target population for vaccine licensure. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial of RTS,S/AS01E vaccine as compared with rabies vaccine in children in Kilifi, Kenya, and Korogwe, Tanzania. The primary end point was fever with a falciparum parasitemia density of more than 2500 parasites per microliter, and the mean duration of follow-up was 7.9 months (range, 4.5 to 10.5). RESULTS: A total of 894 children were randomly assigned to receive the RTS,S/AS01E vaccine or the control (rabies) vaccine. Among the 809 children who completed the study procedures according to the protocol, the cumulative number in whom clinical malaria developed was 32 of 402 assigned to receive RTS,S/AS01E and 66 of 407 assigned to receive the rabies vaccine; the adjusted efficacy rate for RTS,S/AS01E was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 28 to 69; P<0.001) on the basis of Cox regression. Overall, there were 38 episodes of clinical malaria among recipients of RTS,S/AS01E, as compared with 86 episodes among recipients of the rabies vaccine, with an adjusted rate of efficacy against all malarial episodes of 56% (95% CI, 31 to 72; P<0.001). All 894 children were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, which showed an unadjusted efficacy rate of 49% (95% CI, 26 to 65; P<0.001). There were fewer serious adverse events among recipients of RTS,S/AS01E, and this reduction was not only due to a difference in the number of admissions directly attributable to malaria. CONCLUSIONS: RTS,S/AS01E shows promise as a candidate malaria vaccine. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00380393.

Safety of the Malaria Vaccine Candidate, RTS,S/AS01E in 5 to 17 Month Old Kenyan and Tanzanian Children

The malaria vaccine candidate, RTS,S/AS01E, showed promising protective efficacy in a trial of Kenyan and Tanzanian children aged 5 to 17 months. Here we report on the vaccine's safety and tolerability. The experimental design was a Phase 2b, two-centre, double-blind (observer- and participant-blind), randomised (1∶1 ratio) controlled trial. Three doses of study or control (rabies) vaccines were administered intramuscularly at 1 month intervals. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for 7 days after each vaccination. There was surveillance and reporting for unsolicited adverse events for 30 days after each vaccination. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded throughout the study period which lasted for 14 months after dose 1 in Korogwe, Tanzania and an average of 18 months post-dose 1 in Kilifi, Kenya. Blood samples for safety monitoring of haematological, renal and hepatic functions were taken at baseline, 3, 10 and 14 months after dose 1. A total of 894 children received RTS,S/AS01E or rabies vaccine between March and August 2007. Overall, children vaccinated with RTS,S/AS01E had fewer SAEs (51/447) than children in the control group (88/447). One SAE episode in a RTS,S/AS01E recipient and nine episodes among eight rabies vaccine recipients met the criteria for severe malaria. Unsolicited AEs were reported in 78% of subjects in the RTS,S/AS01E group and 74% of subjects in the rabies vaccine group. In both vaccine groups, gastroenteritis and pneumonia were the most frequently reported unsolicited AE. Fever was the most frequently observed solicited AE and was recorded after 11% of RTS,S/AS01E doses compared to 31% of doses of rabies vaccine. The candidate vaccine RTS,S/AS01E showed an acceptable safety profile in children living in a malaria-endemic area in East Africa. More data on the safety of RTS,S/AS01E will become available from the Phase 3 programme

Evaluation of polygenic risk scores for breast and ovarian cancer risk prediction in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers

Background: Genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 94 common single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) associated with breast cancer (BC) risk and 18 associated with ovarian cancer (OC) risk. Several of these are also associated with risk of BC or OC for women who carry a pathogenic mutation in the high-risk BC and OC genes BRCA1 or BRCA2. The combined effects of these variants on BC or OC risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers have not yet been assessed while their clinical management could benefit from improved personalized risk estimates. Methods: We constructed polygenic risk scores (PRS) using BC and OC susceptibility SNPs identified through population-based GWAS: for BC (overall, estrogen receptor [ER]-positive, and ER-negative) and for OC. Using data from 15 252 female BRCA1 and 8211 BRCA2 carriers, the association of each PRS with BC or OC risk was evaluated using a weighted cohort approach, with time to diagnosis as the outcome and estimation of the hazard ratios (HRs) per standard deviation increase in the PRS. Results: The PRS for ER-negative BC displayed the strongest association with BC risk in BRCA1 carriers (HR = 1.27, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.23 to 1.31, P = 8.2 x 10(53)). In BRCA2 carriers, the strongest association with BC risk was seen for the overall BC PRS (HR = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.17 to 1.28, P = 7.2 x 10(-20)). The OC PRS was strongly associated with OC risk for both BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. These translate to differences in absolute risks (more than 10% in each case) between the top and bottom deciles of the PRS distribution; for example, the OC risk was 6% by age 80 years for BRCA2 carriers at the 10th percentile of the OC PRS compared with 19% risk for those at the 90th percentile of PRS. Conclusions: BC and OC PRS are predictive of cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 carriers. Incorporation of the PRS into risk prediction models has promise to better inform decisions on cancer risk management

Evaluation of the Safety and Immunogenicity of the RTS,S/AS01E Malaria Candidate Vaccine When Integrated in the Expanded Program of Immunization

Background. The RTS,S/AS01E malaria candidate vaccine is being developed for immunization of African infants through the Expanded Program of Immunization (EPI). Methods. This phase 2, randomized, open, controlled trial conducted in Ghana, Tanzania, and Gabon evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of RTS,S/AS01E when coadministered with EPI vaccines. Five hundred eleven infants were randomized to receive RTS,S/AS01E at 0, 1, and 2 months (in 3 doses with diphtheria, tetanus, and wholecell pertussis conjugate [DTPw]; hepatitis B [HepB]; Haemophilus influenzae type b [Hib]; and oral polio vaccine [OPV]), RTS,S/AS01E at 0, 1, and 7 months (2 doses with DTPwHepB/Hib+OPV and 1 dose with measles and yellow fever), or EPI vaccines only. Results. The occurrences of serious adverse events were balanced across groups; none were vaccine-related. One child from the control group died. Mild to moderate fever and diaper dermatitis occurred more frequently in the RTS,S/AS01E coadministration groups. RTS,S/AS01E generated high anti-circumsporozoite protein and anti- hepatitis B surface antigen antibody levels. Regarding EPI vaccine responses upon coadministration when considering both immunization schedules, despite a tendency toward lower geometric mean titers to some EPI antigens, predefined noninferiority criteria were met for all EPI antigens except for polio 3 when EPI vaccines were given with RTS,S/AS01E at 0, 1, and 2 months. However, when antibody levels at screening were taken into account, the rates of response to polio 3 antigens were comparable between groups. Conclusion. RTS,S/AS01E integrated in the EPI showed a favorable safety and immunogenicity evaluation. Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00436007. GlaxoSmithKline study ID number: 106369 (Malaria-050

Effect of the Pre-erythrocytic Candidate Malaria Vaccine RTS,S/AS01E on Blood Stage Immunity in Young Children

(See the article by Greenhouse et al, on pages 19-26.