An Assessment of the Role of Chimpanzees in AIDS Vaccine Research

Prior to Simian Immunodeficiency Virus (SIV)-infected macaques becoming the ‘model of choice’ in the 1990s, chimpanzees were widely used in AIDS vaccine research and testing. Faced with the continued failure to develop an effective human vaccine, some scientists are calling for a return to their widespread use. To assess the past and potential future contribution of chimpanzees to AIDS vaccine development, databases and published literature were systematically searched to compare the results of AIDS vaccine trials in chimpanzees with those of human clinical trials, and to determine whether the chimpanzee trials were predictive of the human response. Protective and/or therapeutic responses have been elicited in chimpanzees, via: passive antibody transfer; CD4 analogues; attenuated virus; many types and combinations of recombinant HIV proteins; DNA vaccines; recombinant adenovirus and canarypox vaccines; and many multi-component vaccines using more than one of these approaches. Immunogenicity has also been shown in chimpanzees for vaccinia-based and peptide vaccines. Protection and/or significant therapeutic effects have not been demonstrated by any vaccine to date in humans. Vaccine responses in chimpanzees and humans are highly discordant. Claims of the importance of chimpanzees in AIDS vaccine development are without foundation, and a return to the use of chimpanzees in AIDS research/vaccine development is scientifically unjustifiable

Background morbidity in HIV vaccine trial participants from various geographic regions as assessed by unsolicited adverse events.

Background: Recently, more clinical trials are being conducted in Africa and Asia, therefore, background morbidity in the respective populations is of interest. Between 2000 and 2007, the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative sponsored 19 Phase 1 or 2A preventive HIV vaccine trials in the US, Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa and India, enrolling 900 healthy HIV-1 uninfected volunteers.   Objective To assess background morbidity as reflected by unsolicited adverse events (AEs), unrelated to study vaccine, reported in clinical trials from four continents. Methods All but three clinical trials were double-blind, randomized, and placebo-controlled. Study procedures and data collection methods were standardized. The frequency and severity of AEs reported during the first year of the trials were analyzed. To avoid confounding by vaccine-related events, solicited reactogenicity and other AEs occurring within 28 d after any vaccination were excluded. Results In total, 2134 AEs were reported by 76% of all participants; 73% of all events were mild. The rate of AEs did not differ between placebo and vaccine recipients. Overall, the percentage of participants with any AE was higher in Africa (83%) compared with Europe (71%), US (74%) and India (65%), while the percentage of participants with AEs of moderate or greater severity was similar in all regions except India. In all regions, the most frequently reported AEs were infectious diseases, followed by gastrointestinal disorders. Conclusions Despite some regional differences, in these healthy participants selected for low risk of HIV infection, background morbidity posed no obstacle to clinical trial conduct and interpretation. Data from controlled clinical trials of preventive interventions can offer valuable insights into the health of the eligible population