Introduction: Comics and Adaptation

This introduction to this special issue of European Comic Art on ‘Comics and Adaptation’ provides a brief overview of the field of adaptation studies, with a particular focus on its considerable developments and expansion since the late 1990s, as it has moved beyond a comparative novel-to-film approach to centre instead around questions of intertextuality and hypertextuality. This special issue aims to contribute to this field and to the growing body of works on comics and adaptation. The authors explore questions of transnational circulation of visual, narrative and generic motifs (Boillat); heteronormalisation and phallogocentrism (Krauthaker and Connolly); authenticity of drawn events (Lecomte); identity in a stateless minoritised culture (Blin-Rolland); ‘high’ and popular culture (Blank); reverence in comic adaptations of the literary canon (de Rooy); and documentary and parody (Ripley).</jats:p

Evaluation of the immune response to RTS,S/AS01 and RTS,S/AS02 adjuvanted vaccines : randomized, double-blind study in malaria-naïve adults

This phase II, randomized, double-blind study evaluated the immunogenicity of RTS, S vaccines containing Adjuvant System AS 01 or AS 02 as compared with non-adjuvanted RTS, S in healthy, malaria-naive adults (NCT00443131). Thirty-six subjects were randomized (1:1:1) to receive RTS, S/AS 01, RTS, S/AS 02, or RTS, S/saline at months 0, 1, and 2. Antibody responses to Plasmodium falciparum circumsporozoite (CS) and hepatitis B surface (HBs) antigens were assessed and cell-mediated immune responses evaluated by flow cytometry using intracellular cytokine staining on peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Anti-CS antibody avidity was also characterized. Safety and reactogenicity after each vaccine dose were monitored. One month after the third vaccine dose, RTS, S/AS 01 (160.3 EU/mL [95%CI: 114.1-225.4]) and RTS, S/AS 02 (77.4 EU/mL (95%CI: 47.3-126.7)) recipients had significantly higher anti-CS antibody geometric mean titers (GMTs) than recipients of RTS, S/saline (12.2 EU/mL (95%CI: 4.8-30.7); P < 0.0001 and P = 0.0011, respectively). The anti-CS antibody GMT was significantly higher with RTS, S/AS 01 than with RTS, S/AS 02 (P = 0.0135). Anti-CS antibody avidity was in the same range in all groups. CS- and HBs-specific CD4(+) T cell responses were greater for both RTS, S/AS groups than for the RTS, S/saline group. Reactogenicity was in general higher for RTS, S/AS compared with RTS, S/saline. Most grade 3 solicited adverse events (AEs) were of short duration and grade 3 solicited general AEs were infrequent in the 3 groups. No serious adverse events were reported. In conclusion, in comparison with non-adjuvanted RTS, S, both RTS, S/AS vaccines exhibited better CS-specific immune responses. The anti-CS antibody response was significantly higher with RTS, S/AS 01 than with RTS, S/AS 02. The adjuvanted vaccines had acceptable safety profiles

Design of a phase III multicenter trial to evaluate the efficacy of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in children across diverse transmission settings in Africa

BACKGROUND\ud \ud GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals and the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative are working in partnership to develop a malaria vaccine to protect infants and children living in malaria endemic regions of sub-Saharan Africa, which can be delivered through the Expanded Programme on Immunization. The RTS,S/AS candidate vaccine has been evaluated in multiple phase I/II studies and shown to have a favourable safety profile and to be well-tolerated in both adults and children. This paper details the design of the phase III multicentre efficacy trial of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine candidate, which is pivotal for licensure and policy decision-making.\ud \ud METHODS\ud \ud The phase III trial is a randomized, controlled, multicentre, participant- and observer-blind study on-going in 11 centres associated with different malaria transmission settings in seven countries in sub-Saharan Africa. A minimum of 6,000 children in each of two age categories (6-12 weeks, 5-17 months) have been enrolled. Children were randomized 1:1:1 to one of three study groups: (1) primary vaccination with RTS,S/AS01 and booster dose of RTS,S/AS01; (2) primary vaccination with RTS,S/AS01 and a control vaccine at time of booster; (3) primary vaccination with control vaccine and a control vaccine at time of booster. Primary vaccination comprises three doses at monthly intervals; the booster dose is administered at 18 months post-primary course. Subjects will be followed to study month 32. The co-primary objectives are the evaluation of efficacy over one year post-dose 3 against clinical malaria when primary immunization is delivered at: (1) 6-12 weeks of age, with co-administration of DTPwHepB/Hib antigens and OPV; (2) 5-17 months of age. Secondary objectives include evaluation of vaccine efficacy against severe malaria, anaemia, malaria hospitalization, fatal malaria, all-cause mortality and other serious illnesses including sepsis and pneumonia. Efficacy of the vaccine against clinical malaria under different transmission settings, the evolution of efficacy over time and the potential benefit of a booster will be evaluated. In addition, the effect of RTS,S/AS01 vaccination on growth, and the safety and immunogenicity in HIV-infected and malnourished children will be assessed. Safety of the primary course of immunization and the booster dose will be documented in both age categories.\ud \ud CONCLUSIONS\ud \ud This pivotal phase III study of the RTS,S/AS01 candidate malaria vaccine in African children was designed and implemented by the Clinical Trials Partnership Committee. The study will provide efficacy and safety data to fulfil regulatory requirements, together with data on a broad range of endpoints that will facilitate the evaluation of the public health impact of the vaccine and will aid policy and implementation decisions.\ud \ud TRIAL REGISTRATION\ud \ud Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00866619

Randomized, Controlled Trial of the Long Term Safety, Immunogenicity and Efficacy of RTS,S/AS02(D) Malaria Vaccine in Infants Living in a Malaria-Endemic Region.

The RTS,S/AS malaria candidate vaccine is being developed with the intent to be delivered, if approved, through the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) of the World Health Organization. Safety, immunogenicity and efficacy of the RTS,S/AS02(D) vaccine candidate when integrated into a standard EPI schedule for infants have been reported over a nine-month surveillance period. This paper describes results following 20 months of follow up. This Phase IIb, single-centre, randomized controlled trial enrolled 340 infants in Tanzania to receive three doses of RTS,S/AS02(D) or hepatitis B vaccine at 8, 12, and 16 weeks of age. All infants also received DTPw/Hib (diphtheria and tetanus toxoids, whole-cell pertussis vaccine, conjugated Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccine) at the same timepoints. The study was double-blinded to month 9 and single-blinded from months 9 to 20. From month 0 to 20, at least one SAE was reported in 57/170 infants who received RTS,S/AS02(D) (33.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 26.5, 41.2) and 62/170 infants who received hepatitis B vaccine (36.5%; 95% CI: 29.2, 44.2). The SAE profile was similar in both vaccine groups; none were considered to be related to vaccination. At month 20, 18 months after completion of vaccination, 71.8% of recipients of RTS,S/AS02(D) and 3.8% of recipients of hepatitis B vaccine had seropositive titres for anti-CS antibodies; seroprotective levels of anti-HBs antibodies remained in 100% of recipients of RTS,S/AS02(D) and 97.7% recipients of hepatitis B vaccine. Anti-HBs antibody GMTs were higher in the RTS,S/AS02(D) group at all post-vaccination time points compared to control. According to protocol population, vaccine efficacy against multiple episodes of malaria disease was 50.7% (95% CI: -6.5 to 77.1, p = 0.072) and 26.7% (95% CI: -33.1 to 59.6, p = 0.307) over 12 and 18 months post vaccination, respectively. In the Intention to Treat population, over the 20-month follow up, vaccine efficacy against multiple episodes of malaria disease was 14.4% (95% CI: -41.9 to 48.4, p = 0.545). The acceptable safety profile and good tolerability of RTS,S/AS02(D) in combination with EPI vaccines previously reported from month 0 to 9 was confirmed over a 20 month surveillance period in this infant population. Antibodies against both CS and HBsAg in the RTS,S/AS02(D) group remained significantly higher compared to control for the study duration. Over 18 months follow up, RTS,S/AS02(D) prevented approximately a quarter of malaria cases in the study population. CLINICAL TRIALS: Gov identifier: NCT00289185

A Randomized Trial Assessing the Safety and Immunogenicity of AS01 and AS02 Adjuvanted RTS,S Malaria Vaccine Candidates in Children in Gabon

Background:The malaria vaccine candidate antigen RTS,S includes parts of the pre-erythrocytic stage circumsporozoite protein fused to the Hepatitis B surface antigen. Two Adjuvant Systems are in development for this vaccine, an oil-in water emulsion &ndash; based formulation (AS02) and a formulation based on liposomes (AS01).Methods &amp; Principal Findings:In this Phase II, double-blind study (NCT00307021), 180 healthy Gabonese children aged 18 months to 4 years were randomized to receive either RTS,S/AS01E or RTS,S/AS02D, on a 0&ndash;1&ndash;2 month vaccination schedule. The children were followed-up daily for six days after each vaccination and monthly for 14 months. Blood samples were collected at 4 time-points. Both vaccines were well tolerated. Safety parameters were distributed similarly between the two groups. Both vaccines elicited a strong specific immune response after Doses 2 and 3 with a ratio of anti-CS GMT titers (AS02D/AS01E) of 0.88 (95% CI: 0.68&ndash;1.15) post-Dose 3. After Doses 2 and 3 of experimental vaccines, anti-CS and anti-HBs antibody GMTs were higher in children who had been previously vaccinated with at least one dose of hepatitis B vaccine compared to those not previously vaccinated.Conclusions:RTS,S/AS01E proved similarly as well tolerated and immunogenic as RTS,S/AS02D, completing an essential step in the age de-escalation process within the RTS,S clinical development plan

Evaluation of RTS,S/AS02A and RTS,S/AS01B in Adults in a High Malaria Transmission Area

This study advances the clinical development of the RTS,S/AS01B candidate malaria vaccine to malaria endemic populations. As a primary objective it compares the safety and reactogenicity of RTS,S/AS01B to the more extensively evaluated RTS,S/AS02A vaccine.A Phase IIb, single centre, double-blind, controlled trial of 6 months duration with a subsequent 6 month single-blind follow-up conducted in Kisumu West District, Kenya between August 2005 and August 2006. 255 healthy adults aged 18 to 35 years were randomized (1ratio1ratio1) to receive 3 doses of RTS,S/AS02A, RTS,S/AS01B or rabies vaccine (Rabipur; Chiron Behring GmbH) at months 0, 1, 2. The primary objective was the occurrence of severe (grade 3) solicited or unsolicited general (i.e. systemic) adverse events (AEs) during 7 days follow up after each vaccination.Both candidate vaccines had a good safety profile and were well tolerated. One grade 3 systemic AE occurred within 7 days of vaccination (RTS,S/AS01B group). No unsolicited AEs or SAEs were related to vaccine. A marked increase in anti-CS antibody GMTs was observed post Dose 2 of both RTS,S/AS01B (31.6 EU/mL [95% CI: 23.9 to 41.6]) and RTS,S/AS02A (16.7 EU/mL [95% CI: 12.9 to 21.7]). A further increase was observed post Dose 3 in both the RTS,S/AS01B (41.4 EU/mL [95% CI: 31.7 to 54.2]) and RTS,S/AS02A (21.4 EU/mL [95% CI: 16.0 to 28.7]) groups. Anti-CS antibody GMTs were significantly greater with RTS,S/AS01B compared to RTS,S/AS02A at all time points post Dose 2 and Dose 3. Both candidate vaccines produced strong anti-HBs responses. Vaccine efficacy in the RTS,S/AS01B group was 29.5% (95% CI: -15.4 to 56.9, p = 0.164) and in the RTS,S/AS02A group 31.7% (95% CI: -11.6 to 58.2, p = 0.128).Both candidate malaria vaccines were well tolerated over a 12 month surveillance period. A more favorable immunogenicity profile was observed with RTS,S/AS01B than with RTS,S/AS02A.Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00197054

Domestic Animals and Epidemiology of Visceral Leishmaniasis, Nepal

Proximity of Leishmania donovani–positive goats is a risk factor for human infection

Effect of Care Guided by Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance, Myocardial Perfusion Scintigraphy, or NICE Guidelines on Subsequent Unnecessary Angiography Rates : The CE-MARC 2 Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Among patients with suspected coronary heart disease (CHD), rates of invasive angiography are considered too high. Objective To test the hypothesis that among patients with suspected CHD, cardiovascular magnetic resonance (CMR)–guided care is superior to National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidelines–directed care and myocardial perfusion scintigraphy (MPS)–guided care in reducing unnecessary angiography. Design, Setting, and Participants Multicenter, 3-parallel group, randomized clinical trial using a pragmatic comparative effectiveness design. From 6 UK hospitals, 1202 symptomatic patients with suspected CHD and a CHD pretest likelihood of 10% to 90% were recruited. First randomization was November 23, 2012; last 12-month follow-up was March 12, 2016. Interventions Patients were randomly assigned (240:481:481) to management according to UK NICE guidelines or to guided care based on the results of CMR or MPS testing. Main Outcomes and Measures The primary end point was protocol-defined unnecessary coronary angiography (normal fractional flow reserve >0.8 or quantitative coronary angiography [QCA] showing no percentage diameter stenosis ≥70% in 1 view or ≥50% in 2 orthogonal views in all coronary vessels ≥2.5 mm diameter) within 12 months. Secondary end points included positive angiography, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), and procedural complications. Results Among 1202 symptomatic patients (mean age, 56.3 years [SD, 9.0]; women, 564 [46.9%] ; mean CHD pretest likelihood, 49.5% [SD, 23.8%]), number of patients with invasive coronary angiography after 12 months was 102 in the NICE guidelines group (42.5% [95% CI, 36.2%-49.0%])], 85 in the CMR group (17.7% [95% CI, 14.4%-21.4%]); and 78 in the MPS group (16.2% [95% CI, 13.0%-19.8%]). Study-defined unnecessary angiography occurred in 69 (28.8%) in the NICE guidelines group, 36 (7.5%) in the CMR group, and 34 (7.1%) in the MPS group; adjusted odds ratio of unnecessary angiography: CMR group vs NICE guidelines group, 0.21 (95% CI, 0.12-0.34, P < .001); CMR group vs the MPS group, 1.27 (95% CI, 0.79-2.03, P = .32). Positive angiography proportions were 12.1% (95% CI, 8.2%-16.9%; 29/240 patients) for the NICE guidelines group, 9.8% (95% CI, 7.3%-12.8%; 47/481 patients) for the CMR group, and 8.7% (95% CI, 6.4%-11.6%; 42/481 patients) for the MPS group. A MACE was reported at a minimum of 12 months in 1.7% of patients in the NICE guidelines group, 2.5% in the CMR group, and 2.5% in the MPS group (adjusted hazard ratios: CMR group vs NICE guidelines group, 1.37 [95% CI, 0.52-3.57]; CMR group vs MPS group, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.46-1.95]). Conclusions and Relevance In patients with suspected angina, investigation by CMR resulted in a lower probability of unnecessary angiography within 12 months than NICE guideline–directed care, with no statistically significant difference between CMR and MPS strategies. There were no statistically significant differences in MACE rates. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01664858