Circumsporozoite-specific T cell responses in children vaccinated with RTS,S/AS01 E and protection against P falciparum clinical malaria

Background:RTS,S/AS01E is the lead candidate pre-erythrocytic malaria vaccine. In Phase IIb field trials the safety profile was acceptable and the efficacy was 53% (95%CI 31%–72%) for protecting children against clinical malaria caused by P. falciparum. We studied CS-specific T cell responses in order to identify correlates of protection.Methods and Findings:We used intracellular cytokine staining (for IL2, IFNγ, and TNFα), ex-vivo ELISPOTs (IFNγ and IL2) and IFNγ cultured ELISPOT assays to characterize the CS-specific cellular responses in 407 children (5–17 months of age) in a phase IIb randomized controlled trial of RTS,S/AS01E (NCT00380393). RTS,S/ AS01E vaccinees had higher frequencies of CS-specific CD4+ T cells producing IFNγ, TNFα or IL2 compared to control vaccinees. In a multivariable analysis TNFα+ CD4+ T cells were independently associated with a reduced risk for clinical malaria among RTS,S/AS01E vaccinees (HR = 0.64, 95%CI 0.49–0.86, p = 0.002). There was a non-significant tendency towards reduced risk among control vaccinees (HR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.62–1.03, p = 0.084), albeit with lower CS-specific T cell frequencies and higher rates of clinical malaria. When data from both RTS,S/AS01E vaccinees and control vaccinees were combined (with adjusting for vaccination group), the HR was 0.74 (95%CI 0.62–0.89, p = 0.001). After a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons (n-18), the finding was still significant at p = 0.018. There was no significant correlation between cultured or ex vivo ELISPOT data and protection from clinical malaria. The combination of TNFα+ CD4+ T cells and anti-CS antibody statistically accounted for the protective effect of vaccination in a Cox regression model.Conclusions:RTS,S/AS01E induces CS-specific Th1 T cell responses in young children living in a malaria endemic area. The combination of anti-CS antibody concentrations titers and CS-specific TNFα+ CD4+ T cells could account for the level of protection conferred by RTS,S/AS01E. The correlation between CS-specific TNFα+ CD4+ T cells and protection needs confirmation in other datasets

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 – based formulation (AS02) and a formulation based on liposomes (AS01).Methods & 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 0–1–2 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: 0.68–1.15) 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

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

Immunogenicity and safety of AZD2816, a beta (B.1.351) variant COVID-19 vaccine, and AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) as third-dose boosters for previously vaccinated adults:a multicentre, randomised, partly double-blinded, phase 2/3 non-inferiority immunobridging study in the UK and Poland

Background: This study aimed to evaluate AZD2816, a variant-updated COVID-19 vaccine expressing the full-length SARS-CoV-2 beta (B.1.351) variant spike protein that is otherwise similar to AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19), and AZD1222 as third-dose boosters.Methods: This phase 2/3, partly double-blinded, randomised, active-controlled study was done at 19 sites in the UK and four in Poland. Adult participants who had received a two-dose AZD1222 or mRNA vaccine primary series were randomly assigned by means of an Interactive Response Technology–Randomisation and Trial Supply Management system (1:1 within each primary-series cohort, stratified by age, sex, and comorbidities) to receive AZD1222 or AZD2816 (intramuscular injection; 5 × 1010 viral particles). Participants, investigators, and all sponsor staff members involved in study conduct were masked to randomisation. AZD1222 and AZD2816 doses were prepared by unmasked study staff members. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and humoral immunogenicity (non-inferiority of day-29 pseudovirus neutralising antibody geometric mean titre [GMT] against ancestral SARS-CoV-2: AZD1222 booster vs AZD1222 primary series [historical controls]; margin 0·67; SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04973449, and is completed.Findings: Between June 27 and Sept 30, 2021, 1394 participants of the 1741 screened were randomly assigned to AZD1222 or AZD2816 following an AZD1222 (n=373, n=377) or mRNA vaccine (n=322, n=322) primary series. In SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants receiving AZD1222 or AZD2816, 78% and 80% (AZD1222 primary series) and 90% and 93%, respectively (mRNA vaccine primary series) reported solicited adverse events to the end of day 8; 2%, 2%, 1%, and 1% had serious adverse events and 12%, 12%, 10%, and 11% had adverse events of special interest, respectively, to the end of day 180. The primary immunogenicity non-inferiority endpoint was met: day-29 neutralising antibody GMT ratios (ancestral SARS-CoV-2) were 1·02 (95% CI 0·90–1·14) and 3·47 (3·09–3·89) with AZD1222 booster versus historical controls (AZD1222 and mRNA vaccine primary series, respectively). Responses against beta were greater with AZD2816 versus AZD1222 (GMT ratios, AZD1222, mRNA vaccine primary series 1·84 [1·63–2·08], 2·22 [1·99–2·47]).Interpretation: Both boosters were well tolerated, with immunogenicity against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 similar to AZD1222 primary-series vaccination. AZD2816 gave greater immune responses against beta versus AZD1222.Funding: AstraZeneca

Immunogenicity and safety of AZD2816, a beta (B.1.351) variant COVID-19 vaccine, and AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) as third-dose boosters for previously vaccinated adults: a multicentre, randomised, partly double-blinded, phase 2/3 non-inferiority immunobridging study in the UK and Poland

Background This study aimed to evaluate AZD2816, a variant-updated COVID-19 vaccine expressing the full-length SARS-CoV-2 beta (B.1.351) variant spike protein that is otherwise similar to AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19), and AZD1222 as third-dose boosters. Methods This phase 2/3, partly double-blinded, randomised, active-controlled study was done at 19 sites in the UK and four in Poland. Adult participants who had received a two-dose AZD1222 or mRNA vaccine primary series were randomly assigned by means of an Interactive Response Technology–Randomisation and Trial Supply Management system (1:1 within each primary-series cohort, stratified by age, sex, and comorbidities) to receive AZD1222 or AZD2816 (intramuscular injection; 5 × 1010 viral particles). Participants, investigators, and all sponsor staff members involved in study conduct were masked to randomisation. AZD1222 and AZD2816 doses were prepared by unmasked study staff members. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and humoral immunogenicity (non-inferiority of day-29 pseudovirus neutralising antibody geometric mean titre [GMT] against ancestral SARS-CoV-2: AZD1222 booster vs AZD1222 primary series [historical controls]; margin 0·67; SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04973449, and is completed. Findings Between June 27 and Sept 30, 2021, 1394 participants of the 1741 screened were randomly assigned to AZD1222 or AZD2816 following an AZD1222 (n=373, n=377) or mRNA vaccine (n=322, n=322) primary series. In SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants receiving AZD1222 or AZD2816, 78% and 80% (AZD1222 primary series) and 90% and 93%, respectively (mRNA vaccine primary series) reported solicited adverse events to the end of day 8; 2%, 2%, 1%, and 1% had serious adverse events and 12%, 12%, 10%, and 11% had adverse events of special interest, respectively, to the end of day 180. The primary immunogenicity non-inferiority endpoint was met: day-29 neutralising antibody GMT ratios (ancestral SARS-CoV-2) were 1·02 (95% CI 0·90–1·14) and 3·47 (3·09–3·89) with AZD1222 booster versus historical controls (AZD1222 and mRNA vaccine primary series, respectively). Responses against beta were greater with AZD2816 versus AZD1222 (GMT ratios, AZD1222, mRNA vaccine primary series 1·84 [1·63–2·08], 2·22 [1·99–2·47]). Interpretation Both boosters were well tolerated, with immunogenicity against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 similar to AZD1222 primary-series vaccination. AZD2816 gave greater immune responses against beta versus AZD1222. Funding AstraZeneca

Immunogenicity and safety of AZD2816, a beta (B.1.351) variant COVID-19 vaccine, and AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19) as third-dose boosters for previously vaccinated adults: a multicentre, randomised, partly double-blinded, phase 2/3 non-inferiority immunobridging study in the UK and Poland

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate AZD2816, a variant-updated COVID-19 vaccine expressing the full-length SARS-CoV-2 beta (B.1.351) variant spike protein that is otherwise similar to AZD1222 (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19), and AZD1222 as third-dose boosters. METHODS: This phase 2/3, partly double-blinded, randomised, active-controlled study was done at 19 sites in the UK and four in Poland. Adult participants who had received a two-dose AZD1222 or mRNA vaccine primary series were randomly assigned by means of an Interactive Response Technology-Randomisation and Trial Supply Management system (1:1 within each primary-series cohort, stratified by age, sex, and comorbidities) to receive AZD1222 or AZD2816 (intramuscular injection; 5 × 1010 viral particles). Participants, investigators, and all sponsor staff members involved in study conduct were masked to randomisation. AZD1222 and AZD2816 doses were prepared by unmasked study staff members. The primary objectives were to evaluate safety and humoral immunogenicity (non-inferiority of day-29 pseudovirus neutralising antibody geometric mean titre [GMT] against ancestral SARS-CoV-2: AZD1222 booster vs AZD1222 primary series [historical controls]; margin 0·67; SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04973449, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between June 27 and Sept 30, 2021, 1394 participants of the 1741 screened were randomly assigned to AZD1222 or AZD2816 following an AZD1222 (n=373, n=377) or mRNA vaccine (n=322, n=322) primary series. In SARS-CoV-2-seronegative participants receiving AZD1222 or AZD2816, 78% and 80% (AZD1222 primary series) and 90% and 93%, respectively (mRNA vaccine primary series) reported solicited adverse events to the end of day 8; 2%, 2%, 1%, and 1% had serious adverse events and 12%, 12%, 10%, and 11% had adverse events of special interest, respectively, to the end of day 180. The primary immunogenicity non-inferiority endpoint was met: day-29 neutralising antibody GMT ratios (ancestral SARS-CoV-2) were 1·02 (95% CI 0·90-1·14) and 3·47 (3·09-3·89) with AZD1222 booster versus historical controls (AZD1222 and mRNA vaccine primary series, respectively). Responses against beta were greater with AZD2816 versus AZD1222 (GMT ratios, AZD1222, mRNA vaccine primary series 1·84 [1·63-2·08], 2·22 [1·99-2·47]). INTERPRETATION: Both boosters were well tolerated, with immunogenicity against ancestral SARS-CoV-2 similar to AZD1222 primary-series vaccination. AZD2816 gave greater immune responses against beta versus AZD1222. FUNDING: AstraZeneca

Development of standardized laboratory methods and quality processes for a phase III study of the RTS, S/AS01 candidate malaria vaccine

BACKGROUND\ud \ud A pivotal phase III study of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria candidate vaccine is ongoing in several research centres across Africa. The development and establishment of quality systems was a requirement for trial conduct to meet international regulatory standards, as well as providing an important capacity strengthening opportunity for study centres.\ud \ud METHODS\ud \ud Standardized laboratory methods and quality assurance processes were implemented at each of the study centres, facilitated by funding partners.\ud \ud RESULTS\ud \ud A robust protocol for determination of parasite density based on actual blood cell counts was set up in accordance with World Health Organization recommendations. Automated equipment including haematology and biochemistry analyzers were put in place with standard methods for bedside testing of glycaemia, base excess and lactacidaemia. Facilities for X-rays and basic microbiology testing were also provided or upgraded alongside health care infrastructure in some centres. External quality assurance assessment of all major laboratory methods was established and method qualification by each laboratory demonstrated. The resulting capacity strengthening has ensured laboratory evaluations are conducted locally to the high standards required in clinical trials.\ud \ud CONCLUSION\ud \ud Major efforts by study centres, together with support from collaborating parties, have allowed standardized methods and robust quality assurance processes to be put in place for the phase III evaluation of the RTS, S/AS01 malaria candidate vaccine. Extensive training programmes, coupled with continuous commitment from research centre staff, have been the key elements behind the successful implementation of quality processes. It is expected these activities will culminate in healthcare benefits for the subjects and communities participating in these trials.\ud \ud TRIAL REGISTRATION\ud \ud Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00866619

Efficacy of RTS,S/AS01E vaccine against malaria in children 5 to 17 months of age.

BACKGROUND: Plasmodium falciparum malaria is a pressing global health problem. A previous study of the malaria vaccine RTS,S (which targets the circumsporozoite protein), given with an adjuvant system (AS02A), showed a 30% rate of protection against clinical malaria in children 1 to 4 years of age. We evaluated the efficacy of RTS,S given with a more immunogenic adjuvant system (AS01E) in children 5 to 17 months of age, a target population for vaccine licensure. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized trial of RTS,S/AS01E vaccine as compared with rabies vaccine in children in Kilifi, Kenya, and Korogwe, Tanzania. The primary end point was fever with a falciparum parasitemia density of more than 2500 parasites per microliter, and the mean duration of follow-up was 7.9 months (range, 4.5 to 10.5). RESULTS: A total of 894 children were randomly assigned to receive the RTS,S/AS01E vaccine or the control (rabies) vaccine. Among the 809 children who completed the study procedures according to the protocol, the cumulative number in whom clinical malaria developed was 32 of 402 assigned to receive RTS,S/AS01E and 66 of 407 assigned to receive the rabies vaccine; the adjusted efficacy rate for RTS,S/AS01E was 53% (95% confidence interval [CI], 28 to 69; P<0.001) on the basis of Cox regression. Overall, there were 38 episodes of clinical malaria among recipients of RTS,S/AS01E, as compared with 86 episodes among recipients of the rabies vaccine, with an adjusted rate of efficacy against all malarial episodes of 56% (95% CI, 31 to 72; P<0.001). All 894 children were included in the intention-to-treat analysis, which showed an unadjusted efficacy rate of 49% (95% CI, 26 to 65; P<0.001). There were fewer serious adverse events among recipients of RTS,S/AS01E, and this reduction was not only due to a difference in the number of admissions directly attributable to malaria. CONCLUSIONS: RTS,S/AS01E shows promise as a candidate malaria vaccine. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00380393.

Safety of the Malaria Vaccine Candidate, RTS,S/AS01E in 5 to 17 Month Old Kenyan and Tanzanian Children

The malaria vaccine candidate, RTS,S/AS01E, showed promising protective efficacy in a trial of Kenyan and Tanzanian children aged 5 to 17 months. Here we report on the vaccine's safety and tolerability. The experimental design was a Phase 2b, two-centre, double-blind (observer- and participant-blind), randomised (1∶1 ratio) controlled trial. Three doses of study or control (rabies) vaccines were administered intramuscularly at 1 month intervals. Solicited adverse events (AEs) were collected for 7 days after each vaccination. There was surveillance and reporting for unsolicited adverse events for 30 days after each vaccination. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were recorded throughout the study period which lasted for 14 months after dose 1 in Korogwe, Tanzania and an average of 18 months post-dose 1 in Kilifi, Kenya. Blood samples for safety monitoring of haematological, renal and hepatic functions were taken at baseline, 3, 10 and 14 months after dose 1. A total of 894 children received RTS,S/AS01E or rabies vaccine between March and August 2007. Overall, children vaccinated with RTS,S/AS01E had fewer SAEs (51/447) than children in the control group (88/447). One SAE episode in a RTS,S/AS01E recipient and nine episodes among eight rabies vaccine recipients met the criteria for severe malaria. Unsolicited AEs were reported in 78% of subjects in the RTS,S/AS01E group and 74% of subjects in the rabies vaccine group. In both vaccine groups, gastroenteritis and pneumonia were the most frequently reported unsolicited AE. Fever was the most frequently observed solicited AE and was recorded after 11% of RTS,S/AS01E doses compared to 31% of doses of rabies vaccine. The candidate vaccine RTS,S/AS01E showed an acceptable safety profile in children living in a malaria-endemic area in East Africa. More data on the safety of RTS,S/AS01E will become available from the Phase 3 programme

Evaluation of the Safety and Immunogenicity of the RTS,S/AS01E Malaria Candidate Vaccine When Integrated in the Expanded Program of Immunization

Background. The RTS,S/AS01E malaria candidate vaccine is being developed for immunization of African infants through the Expanded Program of Immunization (EPI). Methods. This phase 2, randomized, open, controlled trial conducted in Ghana, Tanzania, and Gabon evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of RTS,S/AS01E when coadministered with EPI vaccines. Five hundred eleven infants were randomized to receive RTS,S/AS01E at 0, 1, and 2 months (in 3 doses with diphtheria, tetanus, and wholecell pertussis conjugate [DTPw]; hepatitis B [HepB]; Haemophilus influenzae type b [Hib]; and oral polio vaccine [OPV]), RTS,S/AS01E at 0, 1, and 7 months (2 doses with DTPwHepB/Hib+OPV and 1 dose with measles and yellow fever), or EPI vaccines only. Results. The occurrences of serious adverse events were balanced across groups; none were vaccine-related. One child from the control group died. Mild to moderate fever and diaper dermatitis occurred more frequently in the RTS,S/AS01E coadministration groups. RTS,S/AS01E generated high anti-circumsporozoite protein and anti- hepatitis B surface antigen antibody levels. Regarding EPI vaccine responses upon coadministration when considering both immunization schedules, despite a tendency toward lower geometric mean titers to some EPI antigens, predefined noninferiority criteria were met for all EPI antigens except for polio 3 when EPI vaccines were given with RTS,S/AS01E at 0, 1, and 2 months. However, when antibody levels at screening were taken into account, the rates of response to polio 3 antigens were comparable between groups. Conclusion. RTS,S/AS01E integrated in the EPI showed a favorable safety and immunogenicity evaluation. Trial registration. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00436007. GlaxoSmithKline study ID number: 106369 (Malaria-050