Safety and immunogenicity of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in infants and children identified as HIV-infected during a randomized trial in sub-Saharan Africa

Background: We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in a subset of children identified as HIV-infected during a large phase III randomized controlled trial conducted in seven sub-Saharan African countries. Methods: Infants 6–12 weeks and children 5–17 months old were randomized to receive 4 RTS,S/AS01 doses (R3R group), 3 RTS,S/AS01 doses plus 1 comparator vaccine dose (R3C group), or 4 comparator vaccine doses (C3C group) at study months 0, 1, 2 and 20. Infants and children with WHO stage III/IV HIV disease were excluded but HIV testing was not routinely performed on all participants; our analyses included children identified as HIV-infected based on medical history or clinical suspicion and confirmed by polymerase chain reaction or antibody testing. Serious adverse events (SAEs) and anticircumsporozoite (CS) antibodies were assessed. Results: Of 15459 children enrolled in the trial, at least 1953 were tested for HIV and 153 were confirmed as HIV-infected (R3R: 51; R3C: 54; C3C: 48). Among these children, SAEs were reported for 92.2% (95% CI: 81.1–97.8) in the R3R, 85.2% (72.9–93.4) in the R3C and 87.5% (74.8–95.3) in the C3C group over a median follow-up of 39.3, 39.4 and 38.3 months, respectively. Fifteen HIV-infected participants in each group (R3R: 29.4%, R3C: 27.8%, C3C: 31.3%) died during the study. No deaths were considered vaccinationrelated. In a matched case-control analysis, 1 month post dose 3 anti-CS geometric mean antibody concentrations were 193.3 EU/mL in RTS,S/AS01-vaccinated HIV-infected children and 491.5 EU/mL in RTS,S/ AS01-vaccinated immunogenicity controls with unknown or negative HIV status (p = 0.0001). Conclusions: The safety profile of RTS,S/AS01 in HIV-infected children was comparable to that of the comparator (meningococcal or rabies) vaccines. RTS,S/AS01 was immunogenic in HIV-infected children but antibody concentrations were lower than in children with an unknown or negative HIV status

Safety profile of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in infants and children: additional data from a phase III randomized controlled trial in sub-Saharan Africa

A phase III, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial (NCT00866619) in sub-Saharan Africa showed RTS,S/AS01 vaccine efficacy against malaria. We now present in-depth safety results from this study. 8922 children (enrolled at 5-17\xC2\xA0months) and 6537 infants (enrolled at 6-12\xC2\xA0weeks) were 1:1:1-randomized to receive 4 doses of RTS,S/AS01 (R3R) or non-malaria control vaccine (C3C), or 3 RTS,S/AS01 doses plus control (R3C). Aggregate safety data were reviewed by a multi-functional team. Severe malaria with Blantyre Coma Score \xE2\x89\xA42 (cerebral malaria [CM]) and gender-specific mortality were assessed post-hoc. Serious adverse event (SAE) and fatal SAE incidences throughout the study were 24.2%-28.4% and 1.5%-2.5%, respectively across groups; 0.0%-0.3% of participants reported vaccination-related SAEs. The incidence of febrile convulsions in children was higher during the first 2-3 days post-vaccination with RTS,S/AS01 than with control vaccine, consistent with the time window of post-vaccination febrile reactions in this study (mostly the day after vaccination). A statistically significant numerical imbalance was observed for meningitis cases in children (R3R: 11, R3C: 10, C3C: 1) but not in infants. CM cases were more frequent in RTS,S/AS01-vaccinated children (R3R: 19, R3C: 24, C3C: 10) but not in infants. All-cause mortality was higher in RTS,S/AS01-vaccinated versus control girls (2.4% vs 1.3%, all ages) in our setting with low overall mortality. The observed meningitis and CM signals are considered likely chance findings, that - given their severity - warrant further evaluation in phase IV studies and WHO-led pilot implementation programs to establish the RTS,S/AS01 benefit-risk profile in real-life settings

Do pneumococcal conjugate vaccines provide any cross-protection against serotype 19A?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Introduction of the 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (7vCRM) in several countries has led to a rapid, significant drop in vaccine-type invasive pneumococcal disease (IPD) in immunized children. In the United States and some other countries with high antibiotic use, a subsequent rise in serotype 19A IPD has been taken to indicate that the 19F conjugate in the vaccine provides no cross-protection against the immunologically related 19A.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>We systematically assessed the clinical efficacy and effectiveness of 19F-containing vaccines against 19A disease or nasopharyngeal carriage by searching English-language articles in the electronic databases PubMed, Current contents, Scopus, and Embase from 1985 to 2008. The vaccine efficacy and effectiveness point estimates were consistently positive for modest protection against 19A IPD and acute otitis media (AOM). However, statistical significance was not reached in any individual study. No consistent impact of 7vCRM on 19A nasopharyngeal colonization could be detected. These findings are discussed in context of immunogenicity analyses indicating that 7vCRM induces functionally active anti-19A antibodies after the booster dose, and that other 19F-containing vaccine formulations may elicit higher levels of such antibodies after both primary and booster doses.</p> <p>Summary</p> <p>Taken together, these results suggest that 19F-conjugates can provide some protection against 19A disease. The magnitude of this protection in a given setting will likely depend on several factors. These include the anti-19A immunogenicity of the specific vaccine formulation, the number of doses of that formulation needed to elicit the response, and the burden of 19A disease that occurs after those doses. It is possible that a modest protective effect may be obscured by the presence of countervailing selection pressures (such as high antibiotic use) that favor an increase in colonization with antibiotic-non-susceptible strains of 19A.</p

Assessing the safety, impact and effectiveness of RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine following its introduction in three sub-Saharan African countries: methodological approaches and study set-up

Background Following a 30-year development process, RTS,S/AS01E (GSK, Belgium) is the first malaria vaccine to reach Phase IV assessments. The World Health Organization-commissioned Malaria Vaccine Implementation Programme (MVIP) is coordinating the delivery of RTS,S/AS01E through routine national immunization programmes in areas of 3 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The first doses were given in the participating MVIP areas in Malawi on 23 April, Ghana on 30 April, and Kenya on 13 September 2019. The countries participating in the MVIP have little or no baseline incidence data on rare diseases, some of which may be associated with immunization, a deficit that could compromise the interpretation of possible adverse events reported following the introduction of a new vaccine in the paediatric population. Further, effects of vaccination on malaria transmission, existing malaria control strategies, and possible vaccine-mediated selective pressure on Plasmodium falciparum variants, could also impact long-term malaria control. To address this data gap and as part of its post-approval commitments, GSK has developed a post-approval plan comprising of 4 complementary Phase IV studies that will evaluate safety, effectiveness and impact of RTS,S/AS01E through active participant follow-up in the context of its real-life implementation. Methods EPI-MAL-002 (NCT02374450) is a pre-implementation safety surveillance study that is establishing the background incidence rates of protocol-defined adverse events of special interest. EPI-MAL-003 (NCT03855995) is an identically designed post-implementation safety and vaccine impact study. EPI-MAL-005 (NCT02251704) is a cross-sectional pre- and post-implementation study to measure malaria transmission intensity and monitor the use of other malaria control interventions in the study areas, and EPI-MAL-010 (EUPAS42948) will evaluate the P. falciparum genetic diversity in the periods before and after vaccine implementation. Conclusion GSK’s post-approval plan has been designed to address important knowledge gaps in RTS,S/AS01E vaccine safety, effectiveness and impact. The studies are currently being conducted in the MVIP areas. Their implementation has provided opportunities and posed challenges linked to conducting large studies in regions where healthcare infrastructure is limited. The results from these studies will support ongoing evaluation of RTS,S/AS01E’s benefit-risk and inform decision-making for its potential wider implementation across sub-Saharan Africa

The RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in children 5 to 17 months of age at first vaccination

<p>The RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine received a positive scientific opinion from the European Medicines Agency in July 2015. The World Health Organization recommended pilot implementation of the vaccine in children at least 5 months of age according to an initial 3-dose schedule given at least 1 month apart, and a 4th dose 15–18 months post-dose 3. Clinical trials and mathematical modeling demonstrated that the partial protection provided by RTS,S/AS01 against malaria has the potential to provide substantial public health benefit when used in parallel with other malaria interventions, especially in highly endemic regions. The highest impact was seen with 4 vaccine doses in children aged 5 months or older. The vaccine will be evaluated in real-life settings to further assess its impact on mortality, vaccine safety in the context of routine immunization, and programmatic feasibility of delivering a 4-dose vaccination schedule requiring new immunization contacts. If successful, this will pave the way for larger-scale implementation.</p

Prevention of otitis media: Now a reality?

Acute otitis media (AOM), one of the most common childhood diseases, is associated with a substantial medical, social and economic burden. Non-typeable Haemophilus influenzae (NTHi) and Streptococcus pneumoniae are the two main causes of bacterial OM. The 7-valent pneumococcal CRM197-conjugate vaccine (7vCRM, Prevnar (TM)/Prevenar (TM), Wyeth) demonstrated efficacy against AOM caused by vaccine pneumococcal serotypes. Protection against overall AOM was also observed with an 11-valent pneumococcal protein D-conjugate vaccine (11Pn-PD) in the Pneumococcal Otitis EfficacyTrial (POET). Following POET, an optimized 10-valent pneumococcal non-typeable H. influenzae protein D-conjugate vaccine (PHiD-CV; Synflorix (TM), GlaxoSmithlKline Biologicals) was developed. This vaccine includes serotypes 1, 5, and 7F, in addition to those already included in 7vCRM, and was recently licensed in Europe for active immunization against invasive disease and AOM caused by S. pneumoniae in infants and children from 6 weeks up to 2 years of age. The use of protein D as carrier protein permits avoidance of possible interferences known to occur with some conjugate vaccines, and has the added potential benefit of providing protection against NTHi. This review seeks to highlight the recent advances in the field of OM vaccination, with a focus on data regarding the recently licensed PHiD-CV. (C) 2009 Published by Elsevier Ltd

Impact of the Conjugation Method on the Immunogenicity of Streptococcus pneumoniae Serotype 19F Polysaccharide in Conjugate Vaccines ▿

7vCRM (Pfizer, Inc.) and PHiD-CV (GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals) are two pneumococcal conjugate vaccines licensed for the prevention of invasive pneumococcal disease and acute otitis media caused by the vaccine serotypes of Streptococcus pneumoniae. Neither vaccine contains serotype 19A, but both contain the closely related serotype 19F. No decrease in the incidence of serotype 19A disease has been observed following the introduction of 7vCRM, suggesting that this serotype 19F-containing vaccine provides limited cross-protection against serotype 19A. To investigate the impact that conjugation methods may have on antipolysaccharide immune responses and to determine whether this limited cross-protection is characteristic of the serotype 19F polysaccharide or rather of the 19F-CRM (cross-reacting material) conjugate, we compared naturally induced antibodies against serotypes 19F and 19A with antibodies induced after vaccination with different pneumococcal conjugate vaccines. We found that conjugation of the serotype 19F polysaccharide using reductive amination (as in 7vCRM) resulted in the formation of at least one additional epitope that is not present in the native form of the 19F polysaccharide or following 19F conjugation using a bifunctional spacer (as in the prototype vaccine 7vOMPC) or cyanylation (as in PHiD-CV). We also found that pneumococcal vaccines conjugated using cyanylation induce more opsonophagocytic antibodies against serotype 19F and a considerably higher level of cross-opsonophagocytic antibodies against serotype 19A than vaccines conjugated using reductive amination. In conclusion, these results suggest that the conjugation method can influence the functionality of the antibodies induced against the homologous serotype 19F and the cross-reactive serotype 19A of S. pneumoniae