Demonstrating vaccine effectiveness during a waning epidemic: A WHO/NIH meeting report on approaches to development and licensure of Zika vaccine candidates.

Since its peak in early 2016, the incidence of Zika virus (ZIKV) cases has declined to such low levels that Phase 3 field efficacy trials may be infeasible. While great progress was made to rapidly advance several vaccine candidates into Phase 1 and 2 clinical trials, in the absence of sustained viral transmission it may be difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of ZIKV vaccine candidates by conducting traditional clinical disease endpoint efficacy studies. However, ZIKV is still circulating at low levels in some areas and is likely to re-emerge in naïve populations or in sites of prior epidemics once population immunity wanes. Therefore, the public health need for a ZIKV vaccine remains. To facilitate continued ZIKV vaccine development efforts, the World Health Organization's Initiative for Vaccine Research and the National Institutes of Health's National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases co-hosted a meeting of experts in March 2018 to identify strategies to demonstrate vaccine effectiveness in view of waning ZIKV disease incidence. This paper outlines points for consideration for developers, regulators, and other stakeholders working towards a licensed ZIKV vaccine. These deliberations may also be applicable to development of vaccines for other emerging infections where the size, unpredictability, and ephemeral nature of outbreaks makes clinical disease endpoint efficacy trials to demonstrate vaccine effectiveness infeasible

Development of standard clinical endpoints for use in dengue interventional trials: introduction and methodology

Background: As increasing numbers of dengue vaccines and therapeutics are in clinical development, standardized consensus clinical endpoint definitions are urgently needed to assess the efficacy of different interventions with respect to disease severity. We aimed to convene dengue experts representing various sectors and dengue endemic areas to review the literature and propose clinical endpoint definitions for moderate and severe disease based on the framework provided by the WHO 2009 classification. Methods: The endpoints were first proposed and discussed in a structured expert consultation. After that, the Delphi method was carried out to assess the usefulness, validity and feasibility of the standardized clinical disease endpoints for interventional dengue research. Results: Most respondents (> 80%) agreed there is a need for both standardized clinical endpoints and operationalization of severe endpoints. Most respondents (67%) felt there is utility for moderate severity endpoints, but cited challenges in their development. Hospitalization as a moderate endpoint of disease severity or measure of public health impact was deemed to be useful by only 47% of respondents, but 89% felt it could bring about supplemental information if carefully contextualized according to data collection setting. Over half of the respondents favored alignment of the standard endpoints with the WHO guidelines (58%), but cautioned that the endpoints could have ramifications for public health practice. In terms of data granularity of the endpoints, there was a slight preference for a categorical vs numeric system (e.g. 1–10) (47% vs 34%), and 74% of respondents suggested validating the endpoints using large prospective data sets. Conclusion: The structured consensus-building process was successful taking into account the history of the debate around potential endpoints for severe dengue. There is clear support for the development of standardized endpoints for interventional clinical research and the need for subsequent validation with prospective data sets. Challenges include the complexity of developing moderate disease research endpoints for dengue

NIAID Workshop on Flavivirus Immunity

On September 16, 2009, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the U.S. National Institutes of Health, convened a workshop to discuss current knowledge of T- and B-cell immune epitopes for members of the Flavivirus genus (family Flaviviridae), and how this information could be used to increase our basic understanding of host-pathogen interactions and/or advance the development of new or improved vaccines and diagnostics for these pathogens. B-cell and T-cell responses to flaviviruses are critical components of protective immunity against these pathogens. However, they have also been linked to disease pathogenesis. A detailed understanding of the biological significance of immune epitope information may provide clues regarding the mechanisms governing the induction of protective versus pathogenic adaptive immune responses

Dengue illness index—A tool to characterize the subjective dengue illness experience

Dengue virus infections are a major cause of febrile illness that significantly affects individual and societal productivity and drives up health care costs principally in the developing world. Two dengue vaccine candidates are in advanced clinical efficacy trials in Latin America and Asia, and another has been licensed in more than fifteen countries but its uptake has been limited. Despite these advances, standardized metrics for comparability of protective efficacy between dengue vaccines remain poorly defined. The Dengue Illness Index (DII) is a tool that we developed thru refinement of previous similar iterations in an attempt to improve and standardize the measurement of vaccine and drug efficacy in reducing moderate dengue illness. The tool is designed to capture an individual's overall disease experience based on how the totality of their symptoms impacts their general wellness and daily functionality. We applied the DII to a diary card, the Dengue Illness Card (DIC), which was examined and further developed by a working group. The card was then refined with feedback garnered from a Delphi methodology-based query that addressed the adequacy and applicability of the tool in clinical dengue research. There was overall agreement that the tool would generate useful data and provide an alternative perspective to the assessment of drug or vaccine candidates, which in the case of vaccines, are assessed by their reduction in any virologically confirmed dengue of any severity with a focus on the more severe. The DIC needs to be evaluated in the field in the context of vaccine or drug trials, prospective cohort studies, or during experimental human infection studies. Here, we present the final DIC resulting from the Delphi process and offer its further development or use to the dengue research community.status: publishe

Dengue illness index-A tool to characterize the subjective dengue illness experience.

Dengue virus infections are a major cause of febrile illness that significantly affects individual and societal productivity and drives up health care costs principally in the developing world. Two dengue vaccine candidates are in advanced clinical efficacy trials in Latin America and Asia, and another has been licensed in more than fifteen countries but its uptake has been limited. Despite these advances, standardized metrics for comparability of protective efficacy between dengue vaccines remain poorly defined. The Dengue Illness Index (DII) is a tool that we developed thru refinement of previous similar iterations in an attempt to improve and standardize the measurement of vaccine and drug efficacy in reducing moderate dengue illness. The tool is designed to capture an individual's overall disease experience based on how the totality of their symptoms impacts their general wellness and daily functionality. We applied the DII to a diary card, the Dengue Illness Card (DIC), which was examined and further developed by a working group. The card was then refined with feedback garnered from a Delphi methodology-based query that addressed the adequacy and applicability of the tool in clinical dengue research. There was overall agreement that the tool would generate useful data and provide an alternative perspective to the assessment of drug or vaccine candidates, which in the case of vaccines, are assessed by their reduction in any virologically confirmed dengue of any severity with a focus on the more severe. The DIC needs to be evaluated in the field in the context of vaccine or drug trials, prospective cohort studies, or during experimental human infection studies. Here, we present the final DIC resulting from the Delphi process and offer its further development or use to the dengue research community

Target product profile for a dengue therapeutic.

<p>Target product profile for a dengue therapeutic.</p

Development of standard clinical endpoints for use in dengue interventional trials: introduction and methodology

BACKGROUND: As increasing numbers of dengue vaccines and therapeutics are in clinical development, standardized consensus clinical endpoint definitions are urgently needed to assess the efficacy of different interventions with respect to disease severity. We aimed to convene dengue experts representing various sectors and dengue endemic areas to review the literature and propose clinical endpoint definitions for moderate and severe disease based on the framework provided by the WHO 2009 classification. METHODS: The endpoints were first proposed and discussed in a structured expert consultation. After that, the Delphi method was carried out to assess the usefulness, validity and feasibility of the standardized clinical disease endpoints for interventional dengue research. RESULTS: Most respondents (> 80%) agreed there is a need for both standardized clinical endpoints and operationalization of severe endpoints. Most respondents (67%) felt there is utility for moderate severity endpoints, but cited challenges in their development. Hospitalization as a moderate endpoint of disease severity or measure of public health impact was deemed to be useful by only 47% of respondents, but 89% felt it could bring about supplemental information if carefully contextualized according to data collection setting. Over half of the respondents favored alignment of the standard endpoints with the WHO guidelines (58%), but cautioned that the endpoints could have ramifications for public health practice. In terms of data granularity of the endpoints, there was a slight preference for a categorical vs numeric system (e.g. 1-10) (47% vs 34%), and 74% of respondents suggested validating the endpoints using large prospective data sets. CONCLUSION: The structured consensus-building process was successful taking into account the history of the debate around potential endpoints for severe dengue. There is clear support for the development of standardized endpoints for interventional clinical research and the need for subsequent validation with prospective data sets. Challenges include the complexity of developing moderate disease research endpoints for dengue.status: publishe

Viewpoint of a WHO Advisory Group Tasked to Consider Establishing a Closely-monitored Challenge Model of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Healthy Volunteers

WHO convened an Advisory Group (AG) to consider the feasibility, potential value, and limitations of establishing a closely-monitored challenge model of experimental severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthy adult volunteers. The AG included experts in design, establishment, and performance of challenges. This report summarizes issues that render a COVID-19 model daunting to establish (the potential of SARS-CoV-2 to cause severe/fatal illness, its high transmissibility, and lack of a "rescue treatment" to prevent progression from mild/moderate to severe clinical illness) and it proffers prudent strategies for stepwise model development, challenge virus selection, guidelines for manufacturing challenge doses, and ways to contain SARS-CoV-2 and prevent transmission to household/community contacts. A COVID-19 model could demonstrate protection against virus shedding and/or illness induced by prior SARS-CoV-2 challenge or vaccination. A limitation of the model is that vaccine efficacy in experimentally challenged healthy young adults cannot per se be extrapolated to predict efficacy in elderly/high-risk adults

Viewpoint of a WHO Advisory Group Tasked to Consider Establishing a Closely-monitored Challenge Model of Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) in Healthy Volunteers

WHO convened an Advisory Group (AG) to consider the feasibility, potential value, and limitations of establishing a closely-monitored challenge model of experimental severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in healthy adult volunteers. The AG included experts in design, establishment, and performance of challenges. This report summarizes issues that render a COVID-19 model daunting to establish (the potential of SARS-CoV-2 to cause severe/fatal illness, its high transmissibility, and lack of a “rescue treatment” to prevent progression from mild/moderate to severe clinical illness) and it proffers prudent strategies for stepwise model development, challenge virus selection, guidelines for manufacturing challenge doses, and ways to contain SARS-CoV-2 and prevent transmission to household/community contacts. A COVID-19 model could demonstrate protection against virus shedding and/or illness induced by prior SARS-CoV-2 challenge or vaccination. A limitation of the model is that vaccine efficacy in experimentally challenged healthy young adults cannot per se be extrapolated to predict efficacy in elderly/high-risk adults

Development of standard clinical endpoints for use in dengue interventional trials

Dengue is a major public health problem worldwide. Although several drug candidates have been evaluated in randomized controlled trials, none has been effective and at present, early recognition of severe dengue and timely supportive care are used to reduce mortality. While the first dengue vaccine was recently licensed, and several other candidates are in late stage clinical trials, future decisions regarding widespread deployment of vaccines and/or therapeutics will require evidence of product safety, efficacy and effectiveness. Standard, quantifiable clinical endpoints are needed to ensure reproducibility and comparability of research findings. To address this need, we established a working group of dengue researchers and public health specialists to develop standardized endpoints and work towards consensus opinion on those endpoints. After discussion at two working group meetings and presentations at international conferences, a Delphi methodology-based query was used to finalize and operationalize the clinical endpoints. Participants were asked to select the best endpoints from proposed definitions or offer revised/new definitions, and to indicate whether contributing items should be designated as optional or required. After the third round of inquiry, 70% or greater agreement was reached on moderate and severe plasma leakage, moderate and severe bleeding, acute hepatitis and acute liver failure, and moderate and severe neurologic disease. There was less agreement regarding moderate and severe thrombocytopenia and moderate and severe myocarditis. Notably, 68% of participants agreed that a 50,000 to 20,000 mm3 platelet range be used to define moderate thrombocytopenia; however, they remained divided on whether a rapid decreasing trend or one platelet count should be case defining. While at least 70% agreement was reached on most endpoints, the process identified areas for further evaluation and standardization within the context of ongoing clinical studies. These endpoints can be used to harmonize data collection and improve comparability between dengue clinical trials