Safety Monitoring in Group A Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine Trials: Description, Challenges, and Lessons

Background. The determination of the safety profile of any vaccine is critical to its widespread use in any population. In addition, the application of international guidelines to fit local context could be a challenging but important step toward obtaining quality safety data. Methods. In clinical studies of PsA-TT (MenAfriVac), safety was monitored immediately after vaccination, at 4-7 days for postimmunization local and systemic reactions, within 28 days for adverse events, and throughout the duration of study for serious adverse events. Initial and ongoing training of sites' staff were undertaken during the studies, and a data and safety monitoring board reviewed all the data during and after the studies. Results. The safety of PsA-TT was evaluated according to international standards despite obvious challenges in remote areas where these studies were conducted. These challenges included the need for uniformity of methods, timely reporting in the context of frequent communication problems, occurrence of seasonal diseases such as malaria and rotavirus diarrhea, and healthcare systems that required improvement. Conclusions. The trials of PsA-TT highlighted the value of a robust vaccine development plan and design so that lessons learned in initial studies were incorporated into the subsequent ones, initial training and periodic retraining, strict monitoring of all procedures, and continuous channel of communication with all stakeholders that enabled the application of international requirements to local settings, with high quality of dat

Ethical Challenges and Lessons Learned During the Clinical Development of a Group A Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine.

BACKGROUND: The group A meningococcal vaccine (PsA-TT) clinical development plan included clinical trials in India and in the West African region between 2005 and 2013. During this period, the Meningitis Vaccine Project (MVP) accumulated substantial experience in the ethical conduct of research to the highest standards. METHODS: Because of the public-private nature of the sponsorship of these trials and the extensive international collaboration with partners from a diverse setting of countries, the ethical review process was complex and required strategic, timely, and attentive communication to ensure the smooth review and approval for the clinical studies. Investigators and their site teams fostered strong community relationships prior to, during, and after the studies to ensure the involvement and the ownership of the research by the participating populations. As the clinical work proceeded, investigators and sponsors responded to specific questions of informed consent, pregnancy testing, healthcare, disease prevention, and posttrial access. RESULTS: Key factors that led to success included (1) constant dialogue between partners to explore and answer all ethical questions; (2) alertness and preparedness for emerging ethical questions during the research and in the context of evolving international ethics standards; and (3) care to assure that approaches were acceptable in the diverse community contexts. CONCLUSIONS: Many of the ethical issues encountered during the PsA-TT clinical development are familiar to groups conducting field trials in different cultural settings. The successful approaches used by the MVP clinical team offer useful examples of how these problems were resolved. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ISRCTN17662153 (PsA-TT-001); ISRTCN78147026 (PsA-TT-002); ISRCTN87739946 (PsA-TT-003); ISRCTN46335400 (PsA-TT-003a); ISRCTN82484612 (PsA-TT-004); CTRI/2009/091/000368 (PsA-TT-005); PACTR ATMR2010030001913177 (PsA-TT-006); PACTR201110000328305 (PsA-TT-007)