A phase 2b randomized, controlled trial of the efficacy of the GMZ2 malaria vaccine in African children.

: GMZ2 is a recombinant protein malaria vaccine, comprising two blood-stage antigens of Plasmodium falciparum, glutamate-rich protein and merozoite surface protein 3. We assessed efficacy of GMZ2 in children in Burkina Faso, Gabon, Ghana and Uganda. : Children 12-60months old were randomized to receive three injections of either 100μg GMZ2 adjuvanted with aluminum hydroxide or a control vaccine (rabies) four weeks apart and were followed up for six months to measure the incidence of malaria defined as fever or history of fever and a parasite density ⩾5000/μL. : A cohort of 1849 children were randomized, 1735 received three doses of vaccine (868 GMZ2, 867 control-vaccine). There were 641 malaria episodes in the GMZ2/Alum group and 720 in the control group. In the ATP analysis, vaccine efficacy (VE), adjusted for age and site was 14% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.6%, 23%, p-value=0.009). In the ITT analysis, age-adjusted VE was 11.3% (95% CI 2.5%, 19%, p-value=0.013). VE was higher in older children. In GMZ2-vaccinated children, the incidence of malaria decreased with increasing vaccine-induced anti-GMZ2 IgG concentration. There were 32 cases of severe malaria (18 in the rabies vaccine group and 14 in the GMZ2 group), VE 27% (95% CI -44%, 63%). : GMZ2 is the first blood-stage malaria vaccine to be evaluated in a large multicenter trial. GMZ2 was well tolerated and immunogenic, and reduced the incidence of malaria, but efficacy would need to be substantially improved, using a more immunogenic formulation, for the vaccine to have a public health role.<br/

Mupirocin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Africa: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background Mupirocin is widely used for nasal decolonization of Staphylococcus aureus to prevent subsequent staphylococcal infection in patients and healthcare personnel. However, the prolonged and unrestricted use has led to the emergence of mupirocin-resistant (mupR) S. aureus. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate the prevalence, phenotypic and molecular characteristics, and geographic spread of mupR S. aureus in Africa. Methods We examined five electronic databases (EBSCOhost, Google Scholar, ISI Web of Science, MEDLINE, and Scopus) for relevant English articles on screening for mupR S. aureus from various samples in Africa. In addition, we performed random effects meta-analysis of proportions to determine the pooled prevalence of mupR S. aureus in Africa. The search was conducted until 3 August 2016. Results We identified 43 eligible studies of which 11 (26%) were obtained only through Google Scholar. Most of the eligible studies (28/43; 65%) were conducted in Nigeria (10/43; 23%), Egypt (7/43; 16%), South Africa (6/43; 14%) and Tunisia (5/43; 12%). Overall, screening for mupR S. aureus was described in only 12 of 54 (22%) African countries. The disk diffusion method was the widely used technique (67%; 29/43) for the detection of mupR S. aureus in Africa. The mupA-positive S. aureus isolates were identified in five studies conducted in Egypt (n = 2), South Africa (n = 2), and Nigeria (n = 1). Low-level resistance (LmupR) and high-level resistance (HmupR) were both reported in six human studies from South Africa (n = 3), Egypt (n = 2) and Libya (n = 1). Data on mupR-MRSA was available in 11 studies from five countries, including Egypt, Ghana, Libya, Nigeria and South Africa. The pooled prevalence (based on 11 human studies) of mupR S. aureus in Africa was 14% (95% CI =6.8 to 23.2%). The proportion of mupA-positive S. aureus in Africa ranged between 0.5 and 8%. Furthermore, the frequency of S. aureus isolates that exhibited LmupR, HmupR and mupR-MRSA in Africa were 4 and 47%, 0.5 and 38%, 5 and 50%, respectively. Conclusions The prevalence of mupR S. aureus in Africa (14%) is worrisome and there is a need for data on administration and use of mupirocin. The disk diffusion method which is widely utilized in Africa could be an important method for the screening and identification of mupR S. aureus. Moreover, we advocate for surveillance studies with appropriate guidelines for screening mupR S. aureus in Africa