Evaluation of RTS,S/AS02A and RTS,S/AS01B in Adults in a High Malaria Transmission Area

This study advances the clinical development of the RTS,S/AS01B candidate malaria vaccine to malaria endemic populations. As a primary objective it compares the safety and reactogenicity of RTS,S/AS01B to the more extensively evaluated RTS,S/AS02A vaccine.A Phase IIb, single centre, double-blind, controlled trial of 6 months duration with a subsequent 6 month single-blind follow-up conducted in Kisumu West District, Kenya between August 2005 and August 2006. 255 healthy adults aged 18 to 35 years were randomized (1ratio1ratio1) to receive 3 doses of RTS,S/AS02A, RTS,S/AS01B or rabies vaccine (Rabipur; Chiron Behring GmbH) at months 0, 1, 2. The primary objective was the occurrence of severe (grade 3) solicited or unsolicited general (i.e. systemic) adverse events (AEs) during 7 days follow up after each vaccination.Both candidate vaccines had a good safety profile and were well tolerated. One grade 3 systemic AE occurred within 7 days of vaccination (RTS,S/AS01B group). No unsolicited AEs or SAEs were related to vaccine. A marked increase in anti-CS antibody GMTs was observed post Dose 2 of both RTS,S/AS01B (31.6 EU/mL [95% CI: 23.9 to 41.6]) and RTS,S/AS02A (16.7 EU/mL [95% CI: 12.9 to 21.7]). A further increase was observed post Dose 3 in both the RTS,S/AS01B (41.4 EU/mL [95% CI: 31.7 to 54.2]) and RTS,S/AS02A (21.4 EU/mL [95% CI: 16.0 to 28.7]) groups. Anti-CS antibody GMTs were significantly greater with RTS,S/AS01B compared to RTS,S/AS02A at all time points post Dose 2 and Dose 3. Both candidate vaccines produced strong anti-HBs responses. Vaccine efficacy in the RTS,S/AS01B group was 29.5% (95% CI: -15.4 to 56.9, p = 0.164) and in the RTS,S/AS02A group 31.7% (95% CI: -11.6 to 58.2, p = 0.128).Both candidate malaria vaccines were well tolerated over a 12 month surveillance period. A more favorable immunogenicity profile was observed with RTS,S/AS01B than with RTS,S/AS02A.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00197054

Evaluation of two formulations of adjuvanted RTS, S malaria vaccine in children aged 3 to 5 years living in a malaria-endemic region of Mozambique: a Phase I/IIb randomized double-blind bridging trial

BACKGROUND: Previous trials of the RTS, S malaria candidate vaccine have shown that this vaccine is safe, tolerated and immunogenic. The development plan for this vaccine aims at administering it in the first year of life through the Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI). The objective was to evaluate the safety and reactogenicity of RTS, S/AS02D (0.5 ml dose), a pediatric formulation of GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals' current malaria candidate vaccine RTS, S/AS02A (0.25 ml dose). A 0.5 ml dose of AS02D is composed of the same active ingredients in the same quantities as in a 0.25 ml dose of AS02A and has been developed to be easily introduced into routine EPI practices. METHODS: We performed a phase I/IIb randomized double-blind bridging study in a malaria-endemic region of Mozambique, to compare the safety and immunogenicity of both candidate vaccines with the aim of replacing RTS, S/AS02A with RTS, S/AS02D as the candidate pediatric vaccine. 200 Mozambican children aged 3 to 5 years were randomized 1:1 to receive one of the 2 vaccines according to a 0, 1, 2 month schedule. RESULTS: Both vaccines were safe and had similar reactogenicity profiles. All subjects with paired pre and post-vaccination samples showed a vaccine response with respect to anti-circumsporozoite (CS) antibodies irrespective of initial anti-CS serostatus. Geometric mean titers (GMTs) were 191 EU/ml (95% CI 150–242) in recipients of RTS, S/AS02D compared to 180 EU/ml (95% CI 146–221) in recipients of RTS, S/AS02A. For the anti-hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg), all subjects were seroprotected at day 90, and the GMTs were 23978 mIU/ml (95% CI 17896–32127) in RTS, S/AS02D recipients and 17410 mIU/ml (95% CI 13322–22752) in RTS, S/AS02A recipients. There was a decrease in anti-CS GMTs between months 3 and 14 in both groups (191 vs 22 EU/mL in RTS, S/AS02D group and 180 vs 29 EU/mL in RTS, S/AS02A group). CONCLUSION: Our data show that the RTS, S/AS02D is safe, well tolerated, and demonstrates non-inferiority (defined as upper limit of the 95% confidence interval of the anti-CS GMT ratio of RTS, S/AS02A to RTS, S/AS02D below 3.0) of the antibody responses to circumsporozoite and HBsAg induced by the RTS, S/AS02D as compared to the RTS, S/AS02A

Safety and immunogenicity of 3 formulations of a Sabin inactivated poliovirus vaccine produced on the PER.C6® cell line: A phase 2, double-blind, randomized, controlled study in infants vaccinated at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age

An inactivated poliovirus vaccine candidate using Sabin strains (sIPV) grown on the PER.C6® cell line was assessed in infants after demonstrated immunogenicity and safety in adults. The study recruited 300 infants who were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive one of 3 dose levels of sIPV or a conventional IPV based on Salk strains (cIPV). Poliovirus-neutralizing antibodies were measured before the first dose and 28 days after the third dose. Reactogenicity was assessed for 7 days and unsolicited adverse events (AEs) for 28 days after each vaccination. Serious AEs (SAEs) were recorded throughout the study. Solicited AEs were mostly mild to moderate. None of the SAEs reported in the study were judged vaccine related, including one fatal SAE due to aspiration of vomitus that occurred 26 days after the third dose of low-dose sIPV. After 3 sIPV vaccinations and across all dose levels, seroconversion (SC) rates were at least 92% against Sabin poliovirus types and at least 80% against Salk types, with a dose-response in neutralizing antibody geometric mean titers (GMTs) observed across the 3 sIPV groups. Compared to cIPV, the 3 sIPV groups displayed similar or higher SC rates and GMTs against the 3 Sabin types but showed a lower response against Salk types 1 and 2; this was most visible for Salk type 1. While the PER.C6® cell line-based sIPV showed an acceptable safety profile and immunogenicity in infants, lower seroprotection against type 1 warrants optimization of dose level and additional clinical evaluation

The Effectiveness of Online Cognitive Behavioral Treatment in Routine Clinical Practice

CONTEXT: Randomized controlled trails have identified online cognitive behavioral therapy as an efficacious intervention in the management of common mental health disorders. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of online CBT for different mental disorders in routine clinical practice. DESIGN: An uncontrolled before-after study, with measurements at baseline, posttest, 6-week follow-up, and 1-year follow-up. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: 1500 adult patients (female: 67%; mean age: 40 years) with a GP referral for psychotherapy were treated at a Dutch online mental health clinic for symptoms of depression (n = 413), panic disorder (n = 139), posttraumatic stress (n = 478), or burnout (n = 470). INTERVENTIONS: Manualized, web-based, therapist-assisted CBT, of which the efficacy was previously demonstrated in a series of controlled trials. Standardized duration of treatment varied from 5 weeks (online CBT for Posttraumatic stress) to 16 weeks (online CBT for Depression). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Validated self-report questionnaires of specific and general psychopathology, including the Beck Depression Inventory, the Impact of Event Scale, the Panic Disorder Severity Scale-Self Report, the Oldenburg Burnout Inventory, and the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales. RESULTS: Treatment adherence was 71% (n = 1071). Study attrition was 21% at posttest, 33% at 6-week FU and 65% at 1-year FU. Mixed-model repeated measures regression identified large short-term reductions in all measures of primary symptoms (d = 1.9±0.2 to d = 1.2±0.2; P<.001), which sustained up to one year after treatment. At posttest, rates of reliable improvement and recovery were 71% and 52% in the completer sample (full sample: 55%/40%). Patient satisfaction was high. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that online therapist-assisted CBT may be as effective in routine practice as it is in clinical trials. Although pre-treatment withdrawal and long-term outcomes require further study, results warrant continued implementation of online CBT