EClinicalMedicine

BACKGROUND: As mortality remains high for patients with Ebola virus disease (EVD) despite new treatment options, the ability to level up the provided supportive care and to predict the risk of death is of major importance. This analysis of the EVISTA cohort aims to describe advanced supportive care provided to EVD patients in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and to develop a simple risk score for predicting in-hospital death, called PREDS. METHODS: In this prospective cohort (NCT04815175), patients were recruited during the 10(th) EVD outbreak in the DRC across three Ebola Treatment Centers (ETCs). Demographic, clinical, biological, virological and treatment data were collected. We evaluated factors known to affect the risk of in-hospital death and applied univariate and multivariate Cox proportional-hazards analyses to derive the risk score in a training dataset. We validated the score in an internal-validation dataset, applying C-statistics as a measure of discrimination. FINDINGS: Between August 1(st) 2018 and December 31(th) 2019, 711 patients were enrolled in the study. Regarding supportive care, patients received vasopressive drug (n = 111), blood transfusion (n = 101), oxygen therapy (n = 250) and cardio-pulmonary ultrasound (n = 15). Overall, 323 (45%) patients died before day 28. Six independent prognostic factors were identified (ALT, creatinine, modified NEWS2 score, viral load, age and symptom duration). The final score range from 0 to 13 points, with a good concordance (C = 86.24%) and calibration with the Hosmer-Lemeshow test (p = 0.12). INTERPRETATION: The implementation of advanced supportive care is possible for EVD patients in emergency settings. PREDS is a simple, accurate tool that could help in orienting early advanced care for at-risk patients after external validation. FUNDING: This study was funded by ALIMA

Challenges of conducting an international observational study to assess immunogenicity of multiple COVID-19 vaccines.

The International Study on COVID-19 Vaccines to Assess Immunogenicity, Reactogenicity, and Efficacy is an observational study to assess the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines used in Democratic Republic of Congo, Guinea, Indonesia, Liberia, Mali, Mexico, and Mongolia. The study, which has enrolled 5,401 adults, is prospectively following participants for approximately two years. This study is important as it has enrolled participants from resource-limited settings that have largely been excluded from COVID-19 research studies during the pandemic. There are significant challenges to mounting a study during an international health emergency, especially in resource-limited settings. Here we focus on challenges and hurdles encountered during the planning and implementation of the study with regard to study logistics, national vaccine policies, pandemic-induced and supply chain constraints, and cultural beliefs. We also highlight the successful mitigation of these challenges through the team's proactive thinking, collaborative approach, and innovative solutions. This study serves as an example of how established programs in resource-limited settings can be leveraged to contribute to biomedical research during a pandemic response. Lessons learned from this study can be applied to other studies mounted to respond rapidly during a global health crisis and will contribute to capacity for stronger pandemic preparedness in the future when there is a crucial need for urgent response and data collection

Design of an observational multi-country cohort study to assess immunogenicity of multiple vaccine platforms (InVITE).

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, COVID-19 vaccines have been developed, and the World Health Oraganization (WHO) has granted emergency use listing to multiple vaccines. Studies of vaccine immunogenicity data from implementing COVID-19 vaccines by national immunization programs in single studies spanning multiple countries and continents are limited but critically needed to answer public health questions on vaccines, such as comparing immune responses to different vaccines and among different populations