Malaria Transmission-Blocking Vaccines: Present Status and Future Perspectives

Transmission-blocking vaccines (TBVs) utilize Plasmodium sexual stage proteins to induce antibodies that prevent parasites from infecting blood-fed mosquitoes. This type of vaccine, which can be considered a “vaccine of solidarity,” reduces Plasmodium infections within communities without conferring direct protective immunity to the vaccine recipients. The leading TBV candidates have advanced to field clinical trials, where vaccine-induced antibody function has been demonstrated in mosquito-feeding assays. However, the duration of functional antibody responses has been short-lived; hence current development has focused on improved adjuvant and vaccine delivery systems to generate long-lasting immune responses. For the future implementation of TBVs, community perceptions and understandings should be considered, and education should be provided on the concept and its value. Implementation will need to be undertaken in harmony with current malaria control policies

Seasonal vaccination against malaria: a potential use for an imperfect malaria vaccine.

In many parts of the African Sahel and sub-Sahel, where malaria remains a major cause of mortality and morbidity, transmission of the infection is highly seasonal. Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC), which involves administration of a full course of malaria treatment to young children at monthly intervals during the high transmission season, is proving to be an effective malaria control measure in these areas. However, SMC does not provide complete protection and it is demanding to deliver for both families and healthcare givers. Furthermore, there is a risk of the emergence in the future of resistance to the drugs, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine, that are currently being used for SMC. Substantial progress has been made in the development of malaria vaccines during the past decade and one malaria vaccine, RTS,S/AS01, has received a positive opinion from the European Medicines Authority and will soon be deployed in large-scale, pilot implementation projects in sub-Saharan Africa. A characteristic feature of this vaccine, and potentially of some of the other malaria vaccines under development, is that they provide a high level of efficacy during the period immediately after vaccination, but that this wanes rapidly, perhaps because it is difficult to develop effective immunological memory to malaria antigens in subjects exposed previously to malaria infection. A potentially effective way of using malaria vaccines with high initial efficacy but which provide only a short period of protection could be annual, mass vaccination campaigns shortly before each malaria transmission season in areas where malaria transmission is confined largely to a few months of the year

Dispersible formulation of artemether/lumefantrine: specifically developed for infants and young children

Infants and children under five years of age are the most vulnerable to malaria with over 1,700 deaths per day from malaria in this group. However, until recently, there were no WHO-endorsed paediatric anti-malarial formulations available

Evaluation of seasonal malaria chemoprevention in two areas of intense seasonal malaria transmission: Secondary analysis of a household-randomised, placebo-controlled trial in Houndé District, Burkina Faso and Bougouni District, Mali.

BACKGROUND: Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) is now widely deployed in the Sahel, including several countries that are major contributors to the global burden of malaria. Consequently, it is important to understand whether SMC continues to provide a high level of protection and how SMC might be improved. SMC was evaluated using data from a large, household-randomised trial in Houndé, Burkina Faso and Bougouni, Mali. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The parent trial evaluated monthly SMC plus either azithromycin (AZ) or placebo, administered as directly observed therapy 4 times per year between August and November (2014-2016). In July 2014, 19,578 children aged 3-59 months were randomised by household to study group. Children who remained within the age range 3-59 months in August each year, plus children born into study households or who moved into the study area, received study drugs in 2015 and 2016. These analyses focus on the approximately 10,000 children (5,000 per country) under observation each year in the SMC plus placebo group. Despite high coverage and high adherence to SMC, the incidence of hospitalisations or deaths due to malaria and uncomplicated clinical malaria remained high in the study areas (overall incidence rates 12.5 [95% confidence interval (CI): 11.2, 14.1] and 871.1 [95% CI: 852.3, 890.6] cases per 1,000 person-years, respectively) and peaked in July each year, before SMC delivery began in August. The incidence rate ratio comparing SMC within the past 28 days with SMC more than 35 days ago-adjusted for age, country, and household clustering-was 0.13 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.20), P < 0.001 for malaria hospitalisations and deaths from malaria and 0.21 (95% CI 0.20, 0.23), P < 0.001 for uncomplicated malaria, indicating protective efficacy of 87.4% (95% CI: 79.6%, 92.2%) and 78.3% (95% CI: 76.8%, 79.6%), respectively. The prevalence of malaria parasitaemia at weekly surveys during the rainy season and at the end of the transmission season was several times higher in children who missed the SMC course preceding the survey contact, and the smallest prevalence ratio observed was 2.98 (95% CI: 1.95, 4.54), P < 0.001. The frequency of molecular markers of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine (SP) and amodiaquine (AQ) resistance did not increase markedly over the study period either amongst study children or amongst school-age children resident in the study areas. After 3 years of SMC deployment, the day 28 PCR-unadjusted adequate clinical and parasitological response rate of the SP + AQ regimen in children with asymptomatic malaria was 98.3% (95% CI: 88.6%, 99.8%) in Burkina Faso and 96.1% (95% CI: 91.5%, 98.2%) in Mali. Key limitations of this study are the potential overdiagnosis of uncomplicated malaria by rapid diagnostic tests and the potential for residual confounding from factors related to adherence to the monthly SMC schedule. CONCLUSION: Despite strong evidence that SMC is providing a high level of protection, the burden of malaria remains substantial in the 2 study areas. These results emphasise the need for continuing support of SMC programmes. A fifth monthly SMC course is needed to adequately cover the whole transmission season in the study areas and in settings with similar epidemiology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The AZ-SMC trial in which these data were collected was registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02211729

Seasonal malaria vaccination: protocol of a phase 3 trial of seasonal vaccination with the RTS,S/AS01E vaccine, seasonal malaria chemoprevention and the combination of vaccination and chemoprevention.

INTRODUCTION: Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC), with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine plus amodiaquine (SP+AQ) is effective but does not provide complete protection against clinical malaria. The RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine provides a high level of protection shortly after vaccination, but this wanes rapidly. Such a vaccine could be an alternative or additive to SMC. This trial aims to determine whether seasonal vaccination with RTS,S/AS01E vaccine could be an alternative to SMC and whether a combination of the two interventions would provide added benefits. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is an individually randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. 5920 children aged 5-17 months were enrolled in April 2017 in Mali and Burkina Faso. Children in group 1 received three priming doses of RTS,S/AS01E vaccine before the start of the 2017 malaria transmission season and a booster dose at the beginning of two subsequent transmission seasons. In addition, they received SMC SP+AQ placebo on four occasions each year. Children in group 2 received three doses of rabies vaccine in year 1 and hepatitis A vaccine in years 2 and 3 together with four cycles of SMC SP+AQ each year. Children in group 3 received RTS,S/AS01E vaccine and four courses of SMC SP+AQ. Incidence of clinical malaria is determined by case detection at health facilities. Weekly active surveillance for malaria is undertaken in a randomly selected subset of children. The prevalence of malaria is measured in surveys at the end of each transmission season. The primary endpoint is the incidence of clinical malaria confirmed by a positive blood film with a minimum parasite density of 5000 /µL. Primary analysis will be by modified intention to treat defined as children who have received the first dose of the malaria or control vaccine. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The protocol was approved by the national ethics committees of Mali and Burkina Faso and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine. The results will be presented to all stakeholders and published in open access journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03143218; Pre-results

Plasmodium falciparum Plasmepsin 2 Duplications, West Africa

Dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine (DHA/PPQ) is increasingly deployed as antimalaria drug in Africa. We report the detection in Mali of Plasmodium falciparum infections carrying plasmepsin 2 duplications (associated with piperaquine resistance) in 7/65 recurrent infections within 2 months after DHA/PPQ treatment. These findings raise concerns about the long-term efficacy of DHA/PPQ treatment in Africa.This work was supported by a Swedish Research Council Grant (no. VR-2014-3134). The WANECAM study is funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trial Partnership and by the Medicines for Malaria Venture (Geneva, Switzerland) and is co-funded by the United Kingdom Medical Research Councils, the Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, the German Ministry for Education and Research, the University Claude Bernard (Lyon, France), the University of Science, Techniques, and Technologies of Bamako (Bamako, Mali), the Centre National de Recherche et de Formation sur le Paludisme (Burkina Faso), the Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Sante (Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso), and the Centre National de Formation et de Recherche en Sante Rurale (Guinea).J.I. was supported by EuroInkaNet/Erasmus Mundus Program. Fundacao para a Ciencia e Tecnologia supports M.S. (grant no. SFRH/BD/129769/2017), M.I.V. (grant no. SFRH/BPD/76614/2011), and P.E.F. (grant no. IF/00143/2015)

Efficacy of chloroquine, amodiaquine and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria: revisiting molecular markers in an area of emerging AQ and SP resistance in Mali

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>To update the National Malaria Control Programme of Mali on the efficacy of chloroquine, amodiaquine and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine in the treatment of uncomplicated <it>falciparum </it>malaria.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>During the malaria transmission seasons of 2002 and 2003, 455 children – between six and 59 months of age, with uncomplicated malaria in Kolle, Mali, were randomly assigned to one of three treatment arms. <it>In vivo </it>outcomes were assessed using WHO standard protocols. Genotyping of <it>msp1</it>, <it>msp2 </it>and CA1 polymorphisms were used to distinguish reinfection from recrudescent parasites (molecular correction).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Day 28 adequate clinical and parasitological responses (ACPR) were 14.1%, 62.3% and 88.9% in 2002 and 18.2%, 60% and 85.2% in 2003 for chloroquine, amodiaquine and sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine, respectively. After molecular correction, ACPRs (cACPR) were 63.2%, 88.5% and 98.0% in 2002 and 75.5%, 85.2% and 96.6% in 2003 for CQ, AQ and SP, respectively. Amodiaquine was the most effective on fever. Amodiaquine therapy selected molecular markers for chloroquine resistance, while in the sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine arm the level of <it>dhfr </it>triple mutant and <it>dhfr</it>/<it>dhps </it>quadruple mutant increased from 31.5% and 3.8% in 2002 to 42.9% and 8.9% in 2003, respectively. No infection with <it>dhps </it>540E was found.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>In this study, treatment with sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine emerged as the most efficacious on uncomplicated falciparum malaria followed by amodiaquine. The study demonstrated that sulphadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine were appropriate partner drugs that could be associated with artemisinin derivatives in an artemisinin-based combination therapy.</p

Cost-effectiveness of district-wide seasonal malaria chemoprevention when implemented through routine malaria control programme in Kita, Mali using fixed point distribution

Background Seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) is a strategy for malaria control recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO) since 2012 for Sahelian countries. The Mali National Malaria Control Programme adopted a plan for pilot implementation and nationwide scale-up by 2016. Given that SMC is a relatively new approach, there is an urgent need to assess the costs and cost effectiveness of SMC when implemented through the routine health system to inform decisions on resource allocation. Methods Cost data were collected from pilot implementation of SMC in Kita district, which targeted 77,497 children aged 3–59 months. Starting in August 2014, SMC was delivered by fixed point distribution in villages with the first dose observed each month. Treatment consisted of sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and amodiaquine once a month for four consecutive months, or rounds. Economic and financial costs were collected from the provider perspective using an ingredients approach. Effectiveness estimates were based upon a published mathematical transmission model calibrated to local epidemiology, rainfall patterns and scale-up of interventions. Incremental cost effectiveness ratios were calculated for the cost per malaria episode averted, cost per disability adjusted life years (DALYs) averted, and cost per death averted. Results The total economic cost of the intervention in the district of Kita was US $357,494. Drug costs and personnel costs accounted for 34$0.73 and US $0.86, respectively; total annual financial and economic costs per child receiving SMC were US$2.92 and US $3.43, respectively. Accounting for coverage, the economic cost per child fully adherent (receiving all four rounds) was US$6.38 and US $4.69, if weighted highly adherent, (receiving 3 or 4 rounds of SMC). When costs were combined with modelled effects, the economic cost per malaria episode averted in children was US$4.26 (uncertainty bound 2.83–7.17), US $144 (135–153) per DALY averted and US$ 14,503 (13,604–15,402) per death averted. Conclusions When implemented at fixed point distribution through the routine health system in Mali, SMC was highly cost-effective. As in previous SMC implementation studies, financial incentives were a large cost component

Non-Apical Membrane Antigen 1 (AMA1) IgGs from Malian Children Interfere with Functional Activity of AMA1 IgGs as Judged by Growth Inhibition Assay

BACKGROUND: Apical membrane antigen 1 (AMA1) is one of the best-studied blood-stage malaria vaccine candidates. When an AMA1 vaccine was tested in a malaria naïve population, it induced functionally active antibodies judged by Growth Inhibition Assay (GIA). However, the same vaccine failed to induce higher growth-inhibitory activity in adults living in a malaria endemic area. Vaccination did induce functionally active antibodies in malaria-exposed children with less than 20% inhibition in GIA at baseline, but not in children with more than that level of baseline inhibition. METHODS: Total IgGs were purified from plasmas collected from the pediatric trial before and after immunization and pools of total IgGs were made. Another set of total IgGs was purified from U.S. adults immunized with AMA1 (US-total IgG). From these total IgGs, AMA1-specific and non-AMA1 IgGs were affinity purified and the functional activity of these IgGs was evaluated by GIA. Competition ELISA was performed with the U.S.-total IgG and non-AMA1 IgGs from malaria-exposed children. RESULTS: AMA1-specific IgGs from malaria-exposed children and U.S. vaccinees showed similar growth-inhibitory activity at the same concentrations. When mixed with U.S.-total IgG, non-AMA1 IgGs from children showed an interference effect in GIA. Interestingly, the interference effect was higher with non-AMA1 IgGs from higher titer pools. The non-AMA1 IgGs did not compete with anti-AMA1 antibody in U.S.-total IgG in the competition ELISA. CONCLUSION: Children living in a malaria endemic area have a fraction of IgGs that interferes with the biological activity of anti-AMA1 antibody as judged by GIA. While the mechanism of interference is not resolved in this study, these results suggest it is not caused by direct competition between non-AMA1 IgG and AMA1 protein. This study indicates that anti-malaria IgGs induced by natural exposure may interfere with the biological effect of antibody induced by an AMA1-based vaccine in the target population

A multi-center, open-label trial to compare the efficacy and pharmacokinetics of Artemether-Lumefantrine in children with severe acute malnutrition versus children without severe acute malnutrition: study protocol for the MAL-NUT study

BACKGROUND:Malnutrition and malaria frequently coexist in sub-Saharan African countries. Studies on efficacy of antimalarial treatments usually follow the WHO standardized protocol in which severely malnourished children are systematically excluded.Few studies have assessed the efficacy of chloroquine, sulfadoxine-pyrimethamine and quinine in severe acute malnourished children. Overall, efficacy of these treatments appeared to be reduced, attributed to lower immunity and for some antimalarials altered pharmacokinetic profiles and lower drug concentrations. However, similar research on the efficacy and pharmacokinetic profiles of artemisinin-combination therapies (ACTs) and especially artemether-lumefantrine in malnourished children is currently lacking.The main objective of this study is to assess whether artemether-lumefantrine is less efficacious in children suffering from severe acute malnutrition (SAM) compared to non-SAM children, and if so, to what extent this can be attributed to a sub-optimal pharmacokinetic profile.METHODS/DESIGN:In two sites, Ouelessebougou, Mali and Maradi, Niger, children with uncomplicated microscopically-confirmed P. falciparum malaria aged between 6 and 59 months will be enrolled. Two non-SAM children will be enrolled after the enrolment of each SAM case. Children with severe manifestations of malaria or complications of acute malnutrition needing intensive treatment will be excluded.Treatment intakes will be supervised and children will be followed-up for 42 days, according to WHO guidance for surveillance of antimalarial drug efficacy. Polymerase Chain Reaction genotyping will be used to distinguish recrudescence from re-infection. SAM children will also benefit from the national nutritional rehabilitation program.Outcomes will be compared between the SAM and non-SAM populations. The primary outcome will be adequate clinical and parasitological response at day 28 after PCR correction, estimated by Kaplan-Meier analysis. To assess the pharmacokinetic profile of lumefantrine, a sparse sampling approach will be used with randomized allocation of sampling times (5 per child). A total of 180 SAM children and 360 non-SAM children will be recruited during the 2013 and 2014 malaria seasons.DISCUSSION:This study will provide important information that is currently lacking on the effect of SAM on therapeutic efficacy and pharmacokinetic profile of artemether-lumefantrine. If it shows lower therapeutic efficacy and decreased lumefantrine concentrations, it would inform dose optimization studies in SAM children.TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT0195890