Safety and efficacy of malaria vaccine candidate R21/Matrix-M in African children: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial

Background Recently, we found that a new malaria vaccine, R21/Matrix-M, had over 75% efficacy against clinical malaria with seasonal administration in a phase 2b trial in Burkina Faso. Here, we report on safety and efficacy of the vaccine in a phase 3 trial enrolling over 4800 children across four countries followed for up to 18 months at seasonal sites and 12 months at standard sites. Methods We did a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial of the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine across five sites in four African countries with differing malaria transmission intensities and seasonality. Children (aged 5–36 months) were enrolled and randomly assigned (2:1) to receive 5 μg R21 plus 50 μg Matrix-M or a control vaccine (licensed rabies vaccine [Abhayrab]). Participants, their families, investigators, laboratory teams, and the local study team were masked to treatment. Vaccines were administered as three doses, 4 weeks apart, with a booster administered 12 months after the third dose. Half of the children were recruited at two sites with seasonal malaria transmission and the remainder at standard sites with perennial malaria transmission using age-based immunisation. The primary objective was protective efficacy of R21/Matrix-M from 14 days after third vaccination to 12 months after completion of the primary series at seasonal and standard sites separately as co-primary endpoints. Vaccine efficacy against multiple malaria episodes and severe malaria, as well as safety and immunogenicity, were also assessed. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04704830, and is ongoing. Findings From April 26, 2021, to Jan 12, 2022, 5477 children consented to be screened, of whom 1705 were randomly assigned to control vaccine and 3434 to R21/Matrix-M; 4878 participants received the first dose of vaccine. 3103 participants in the R21/Matrix-M group and 1541 participants in the control group were included in the modified per-protocol analysis (2412 [51·9%] male and 2232 [48·1%] female). R21/Matrix-M vaccine was well tolerated, with injection site pain (301 [18·6%] of 1615 participants) and fever (754 [46·7%] of 1615 participants) as the most frequent adverse events. Number of adverse events of special interest and serious adverse events did not significantly differ between the vaccine groups. There were no treatment-related deaths. 12-month vaccine efficacy was 75% (95% CI 71–79; p<0·0001) at the seasonal sites and 68% (61–74; p<0·0001) at the standard sites for time to first clinical malaria episode. Similarly, vaccine efficacy against multiple clinical malaria episodes was 75% (71–78; p<0·0001) at the seasonal sites and 67% (59–73; p<0·0001) at standard sites. A modest reduction in vaccine efficacy was observed over the first 12 months of follow-up, of similar size at seasonal and standard sites. A rate reduction of 868 (95% CI 762–974) cases per 1000 children-years at seasonal sites and 296 (231–362) at standard sites occurred over 12 months. Vaccine-induced antibodies against the conserved central Asn-Ala-Asn-Pro (NANP) repeat sequence of circumsporozoite protein correlated with vaccine efficacy. Higher NANP-specific antibody titres were observed in the 5–17 month age group compared with 18–36 month age group, and the younger age group had the highest 12-month vaccine efficacy on time to first clinical malaria episode at seasonal (79% [95% CI 73–84]; p<0·001) and standard (75% [65–83]; p<0·001) sites. Interpretation R21/Matrix-M was well tolerated and offered high efficacy against clinical malaria in African children. This low-cost, high-efficacy vaccine is already licensed by several African countries, and recently received a WHO policy recommendation and prequalification, offering large-scale supply to help reduce the great burden of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa. Funding The Serum Institute of India, the Wellcome Trust, the UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, and Open Philanthropy

The public health impact and cost-effectiveness of the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine: a mathematical modelling study

Background The R21/Matrix-M vaccine has demonstrated high efficacy against Plasmodium falciparum clinical malaria in children in sub-Saharan Africa. Using trial data, we aimed to estimate the public health impact and cost-effectiveness of vaccine introduction across sub-Saharan Africa. Methods We fitted a semi-mechanistic model of the relationship between anti-circumsporozoite protein antibody titres and vaccine efficacy to data from 3 years of follow-up in the phase 2b trial of R21/Matrix-M in Nanoro, Burkina Faso. We validated the model by comparing predicted vaccine efficacy to that observed over 12–18 months in the phase 3 trial. Integrating this framework within a mathematical transmission model, we estimated the cases, malaria deaths, and disability-adjusted life-years (DALYs) averted and cost-effectiveness over a 15-year time horizon across a range of transmission settings in sub-Saharan Africa. Cost-effectiveness was estimated incorporating the cost of vaccine introduction (dose, consumables, and delivery) relative to existing interventions at baseline. We report estimates at a median of 20% parasite prevalence in children aged 2–10 years (PfPR2–10) and ranges from 3% to 65% PfPR2–10. Findings Anti-circumsporozoite protein antibody titres were found to satisfy the criteria for a surrogate of protection for vaccine efficacy against clinical malaria. Age-based implementation of a four-dose regimen of R21/Matrix-M vaccine was estimated to avert 181 825 (range 38 815–333 491) clinical cases per 100 000 fully vaccinated children in perennial settings and 202 017 (29 868–405 702) clinical cases per 100 000 fully vaccinated children in seasonal settings. Similar estimates were obtained for seasonal or hybrid implementation. Under an assumed vaccine dose price of USD 3, the incremental cost per clinical case averted was USD 7 (range 4–48) in perennial settings and USD 6 (3–63) in seasonal settings and the incremental cost per DALY averted was USD 34 (29–139) in perennial settings and USD 30 (22–172) in seasonal settings, with lower cost-effectiveness ratios in settings with higher PfPR2–10. Interpretation Introduction of the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine could have a substantial public health benefit across sub-Saharan Africa. Funding The Wellcome Trust, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the UK Medical Research Council, the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership 2 and 3, the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, and the Serum Institute of India, Open Philanthropy

Efficacy and immunogenicity of R21/Matrix-M vaccine against clinical malaria after 2 years' follow-up in children in Burkina Faso: a phase 1/2b randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Malaria is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. We previously reported the efficacy of the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine, which reached the WHO-specified goal of 75% or greater efficacy over 12 months in the target population of African children. Here, we report the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy results at 12 months following administration of a booster vaccination. METHODS: This double-blind phase 1/2b randomised controlled trial was done in children aged 5-17 months in Nanoro, Burkina Faso. Eligible children were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive three vaccinations of either 5 μg R21/25 μg Matrix-M, 5 μg R21/50 μg Matrix-M, or a control vaccine (the Rabivax-S rabies vaccine) before the malaria season, with a booster dose 12 months later. Children were eligible for inclusion if written informed consent could be provided by a parent or guardian. Exclusion criteria included any existing clinically significant comorbidity or receipt of other investigational products. A random allocation list was generated by an independent statistician by use of block randomisation with variable block sizes. A research assistant from the University of Oxford, independent of the trial team, prepared sealed envelopes using this list, which was then provided to the study pharmacists to assign participants. All vaccines were prepared by the study pharmacists by use of the same type of syringe, and the contents were covered with an opaque label. Vaccine safety, efficacy, and a potential correlate of efficacy with immunogenicity, measured as anti-NANP antibody titres, were evaluated over 1 year following the first booster vaccination. The population in which the efficacy analyses were done comprised all participants who received the primary series of vaccinations and a booster vaccination. Participants were excluded from the efficacy analysis if they withdrew from the trial within the first 2 weeks of receiving the booster vaccine. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03896724), and is continuing for a further 2 years to assess both the potential value of additional booster vaccine doses and longer-term safety. FINDINGS: Between June 2, and July 2, 2020, 409 children returned to receive a booster vaccine. Each child received the same vaccination for the booster as they received in the primary series of vaccinations; 132 participants received 5 μg R21 adjuvanted with 25 μg Matrix-M, 137 received 5 μg R21 adjuvanted with 50 μg Matrix-M, and 140 received the control vaccine. R21/Matrix-M had a favourable safety profile and was well tolerated. Vaccine efficacy remained high in the high adjuvant dose (50 μg) group, similar to previous findings at 1 year after the primary series of vaccinations. Following the booster vaccination, 67 (51%) of 132 children who received R21/Matrix-M with low-dose adjuvant, 54 (39%) of 137 children who received R21/Matrix-M with high-dose adjuvant, and 121 (86%) of 140 children who received the rabies vaccine developed clinical malaria by 12 months. Vaccine efficacy was 71% (95% CI 60 to 78) in the low-dose adjuvant group and 80% (72 to 85) in the high-dose adjuvant group. In the high-dose adjuvant group, vaccine efficacy against multiple episodes of malaria was 78% (95% CI 71 to 83), and 2285 (95% CI 1911 to 2568) cases of malaria were averted per 1000 child-years at risk among vaccinated children in the second year of follow-up. Among these participants, at 28 days following their last R21/Matrix-M vaccination, titres of malaria-specific anti-NANP antibodies correlated positively with protection against malaria in both the first year of follow-up (Spearman's ρ -0·32 [95% CI -0·45 to -0·19]; p=0·0001) and second year of follow-up (-0·20 [-0·34 to -0·06]; p=0·02). INTERPRETATION: A booster dose of R21/Matrix-M at 1 year following the primary three-dose regimen maintained high efficacy against first and multiple episodes of clinical malaria. Furthermore, the booster vaccine induced antibody concentrations that correlated with vaccine efficacy. The trial is ongoing to assess long-term follow-up of these participants and the value of further booster vaccinations. FUNDING: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership 2 (EDCTP2), Wellcome Trust, and NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre. TRANSLATION: For the French translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section

Efficacy of a low-dose candidate malaria vaccine, R21 in adjuvant Matrix-M, with seasonal administration to children in Burkina Faso: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Stalled progress in controlling Plasmodium falciparum malaria highlights the need for an effective and deployable vaccine. RTS,S/AS01, the most effective malaria vaccine candidate to date, demonstrated 56% efficacy over 12 months in African children. We therefore assessed a new candidate vaccine for safety and efficacy. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2b trial, the low-dose circumsporozoite protein-based vaccine R21, with two different doses of adjuvant Matrix-M (MM), was given to children aged 5-17 months in Nanoro, Burkina Faso-a highly seasonal malaria transmission setting. Three vaccinations were administered at 4-week intervals before the malaria season, with a fourth dose 1 year later. All vaccines were administered intramuscularly into the thigh. Group 1 received 5 μg R21 plus 25 μg MM, group 2 received 5 μg R21 plus 50 μg MM, and group 3, the control group, received rabies vaccinations. Children were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to groups 1-3. An independent statistician generated a random allocation list, using block randomisation with variable block sizes, which was used to assign participants. Participants, their families, and the local study team were all masked to group allocation. Only the pharmacists preparing the vaccine were unmasked to group allocation. Vaccine safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy were evaluated over 1 year. The primary objective assessed protective efficacy of R21 plus MM (R21/MM) from 14 days after the third vaccination to 6 months. Primary analyses of vaccine efficacy were based on a modified intention-to-treat population, which included all participants who received three vaccinations, allowing for inclusion of participants who received the wrong vaccine at any timepoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03896724. FINDINGS: From May 7 to June 13, 2019, 498 children aged 5-17 months were screened, and 48 were excluded. 450 children were enrolled and received at least one vaccination. 150 children were allocated to group 1, 150 children were allocated to group 2, and 150 children were allocated to group 3. The final vaccination of the primary series was administered on Aug 7, 2019. R21/MM had a favourable safety profile and was well tolerated. The majority of adverse events were mild, with the most common event being fever. None of the seven serious adverse events were attributed to the vaccine. At the 6-month primary efficacy analysis, 43 (29%) of 146 participants in group 1, 38 (26%) of 146 participants in group 2, and 105 (71%) of 147 participants in group 3 developed clinical malaria. Vaccine efficacy was 74% (95% CI 63-82) in group 1 and 77% (67-84) in group 2 at 6 months. At 1 year, vaccine efficacy remained high, at 77% (67-84) in group 1. Participants vaccinated with R21/MM showed high titres of malaria-specific anti-Asn-Ala-Asn-Pro (NANP) antibodies 28 days after the third vaccination, which were almost doubled with the higher adjuvant dose. Titres waned but were boosted to levels similar to peak titres after the primary series of vaccinations after a fourth dose administered 1 year later. INTERPRETATION: R21/MM appears safe and very immunogenic in African children, and shows promising high-level efficacy. FUNDING: The European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, Wellcome Trust, and National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Developing a new anti-sporozoite malaria vaccine

Malaria is one of the leading infectious causes of morbidity and mortality. There was an estimated 241 million malaria cases and 627,000 deaths in 2020 across 85 malaria endemic countries. When compared with data from recent years, this suggests that global progress has stalled, and that malaria mortality is increasing. There is an urgent need to develop new tools to combat this. Significant progress has been made in malaria vaccine development, with the first malaria vaccine, RTS,S/AS01, achieving prequalification this year (2022). However, the current production capacity of RTS,S/AS01 may not, at least initially, meet the needs of the target population. At the same time, the WHO goal of developing a malaria vaccine with protective efficacy of ≥75% against clinical malaria, for at-risk groups in malaria-endemic areas, over at least 2 years, has not yet been met. R21 is produced by using recombinant HBsAg particles expressing the central repeat and the C-terminus of the Plasmodium falciparum circumsporozoite protein. R21 was initially developed at the University of Oxford and is now manufactured by the Serum Institute of India Pvt. Ltd (SIIPL). R21 is combined with an adjuvant, Matrix-M, manufactured by Novavax AB, to produce the vaccine candidate R21/Matrix-M which targets P. falciparum malaria. In this thesis, I describe the clinical development assessing safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine candidate across a phase I/IIa clinical trial in UK adults (chapter 3); a phase Ib clinical trial in Kenya in adults, young children and infants (chapter 4); and a phase IIb clinical trial in infants in Burkina Faso (chapter 5). I evaluate the composition of the gut microbiome of infants living in malaria endemic areas (the target population for R21/Matrix-M) to assess if this is affected by any specific participant factors. I also assess if the baseline gut microbiome suggests any correlation with antibody responses generated by R21/Matrix-M, and if any association exists between the gut microbiome composition and the total number of malaria episodes experienced at 12 months following vaccinations (chapter 6). The clinical development phases of R21/Matrix-M have demonstrated that the vaccine is safe, immunogenic and protective against malaria. Importantly, efficacy of ≥75% against clinical malaria was noted over 2 years in the target population of African infants, in the phase IIb trial, where vaccinations were administered prior to or at the start of the malaria season. The composition of the gut microbiome varied significantly according to age of the infant but had no impact on the antibody responses to the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine or the number of malaria episodes experienced by an infant. In my conclusions in this thesis, I have reflected on some of the key issues beyond the science that affect deployment and implementation of a successful malaria vaccine. In order to make strides in eliminating malaria in sub-Saharan Africa, it is necessary for there to be cooperation amongst multiple stakeholders; developments in manufacturing and delivery of vaccines; and grassroots participation in vaccine programmes. The results from these trials have led to a phase III trial across five African sites, in East and West Africa, evaluating the safety and efficacy of R21/Matrix-M in areas of differing malaria transmission in a larger number of infants and children. The aim is licensure of a safe, inexpensive vaccine, with high efficacy, that will significantly reduce the malaria disease burden

Deep immune phenotyping and single-cell transcriptomics allow identification of circulating TRM-like cells which correlate with liver-stage immunity and vaccine-induced protection from malaria

Protection from liver-stage malaria requires high numbers of CD8+ T cells to find and kill Plasmodium-infected cells. A new malaria vaccine strategy, prime-target vaccination, involves sequential viral-vectored vaccination by intramuscular and intravenous routes to target cellular immunity to the liver. Liver tissue-resident memory (TRM) CD8+ T cells have been shown to be necessary and sufficient for protection against rodent malaria by this vaccine regimen. Ultimately, to most faithfully assess immunotherapeutic responses by these local, specialised, hepatic T cells, periodic liver sampling is necessary, however this is not feasible at large scales in human trials. Here, as part of a phase I/II P. falciparum challenge study of prime-target vaccination, we performed deep immune phenotyping, single-cell RNA-sequencing and kinetics of hepatic fine needle aspirates and peripheral blood samples to study liver CD8+ TRM cells and circulating counterparts. We found that while these peripheral ‘TRM-like’ cells differed to TRM cells in terms of previously described characteristics, they are similar phenotypically and indistinguishable in terms of key T cell residency transcriptional signatures. By exploring the heterogeneity among liver CD8+ TRM cells at single cell resolution we found two main subpopulations that each share expression profiles with blood T cells. Lastly, our work points towards the potential for using TRM like cells as a correlate of protection by liver-stage malaria vaccines and, in particular, those adopting a prime-target approach. A simple and reproducible correlate of protection would be particularly valuable in trials of liver-stage malaria vaccines as they progress to phase III, large-scale testing in African infants. We provide a blueprint for understanding and monitoring liver TRM cells induced by a prime-target malaria vaccine approach

Deep immune phenotyping and single-cell transcriptomics allow identification of circulating TRM-like cells which correlate with liver-stage immunity and vaccine-induced protection from malaria

Protection from liver-stage malaria requires high numbers of CD8+ T cells to find and kill Plasmodium-infected cells. A new malaria vaccine strategy, prime-target vaccination, involves sequential viral-vectored vaccination by intramuscular and intravenous routes to target cellular immunity to the liver. Liver tissue-resident memory (TRM) CD8+ T cells have been shown to be necessary and sufficient for protection against rodent malaria by this vaccine regimen. Ultimately, to most faithfully assess immunotherapeutic responses by these local, specialised, hepatic T cells, periodic liver sampling is necessary, however this is not feasible at large scales in human trials. Here, as part of a phase I/II P. falciparum challenge study of prime-target vaccination, we performed deep immune phenotyping, single-cell RNA-sequencing and kinetics of hepatic fine needle aspirates and peripheral blood samples to study liver CD8+ TRM cells and circulating counterparts. We found that while these peripheral ‘TRM-like’ cells differed to TRM cells in terms of previously described characteristics, they are similar phenotypically and indistinguishable in terms of key T cell residency transcriptional signatures. By exploring the heterogeneity among liver CD8+ TRM cells at single cell resolution we found two main subpopulations that each share expression profiles with blood T cells. Lastly, our work points towards the potential for using TRM like cells as a correlate of protection by liver-stage malaria vaccines and, in particular, those adopting a prime-target approach. A simple and reproducible correlate of protection would be particularly valuable in trials of liver-stage malaria vaccines as they progress to phase III, large-scale testing in African infants. We provide a blueprint for understanding and monitoring liver TRM cells induced by a prime-target malaria vaccine approach