A Phase II, Randomized Study on an Investigational DTPw-HBV/Hib-MenAC Conjugate Vaccine Administered to Infants in Northern Ghana

BACKGROUND: Combining meningococcal vaccination with routine immunization in infancy may reduce the burden of meningococcal meningitis, especially in the meningitis belt of Africa. We have evaluated the immunogenicity, persistence of immune response, immune memory and safety of an investigational DTPw-HBV/Hib-MenAC conjugate vaccine given to infants in Northern Ghana. METHODS AND FINDINGS: In this phase II, double blind, randomized, controlled study, 280 infants were primed with DTPw-HBV/Hib-MenAC or DTPw-HBV/Hib vaccines at 6, 10 and 14 weeks of age. At 12 months of age, children in each group received a challenge dose of serogroup A+C polysaccharides. Antibody responses were assessed pre, and one month-post dose 3 of the priming schedule and pre and 1 month after administration of the challenge dose. One month post-dose 3, 87.8% and 88.2% of subjects in the study group had bactericidal meningococcal serogroup A (SBA-MenA) and meningococcal serogroup C (SBA-MenC) antibody titres > or = 1:8 respectively. Seroprotection/seropositivity rates to the 5 antigens administered in the routine EPI schedule were non-inferior in children in the study group compared to those in the control group. The percentages of subjects in the study group with persisting SBA-MenA titres > or = 1:8 or SBA-MenC titres > or = 1:8 at the age of 12 months prior to challenge were significantly higher than in control group (47.7% vs 25.7% and 56.4% vs 5.1% respectively). The administration of 10 microg of serogroup A polysaccharide increased the SBA-MenA GMT by 14.0-fold in the DTPW-HBV/HibMenAC-group compared to a 3.8 fold increase in the control-group. Corresponding fold-increases in SBA-MenC titres following challenge with 10 microg of group C polysaccharide were 18.8 and 1.9 respectively. Reactogenicity following primary vaccination or the administration of the challenge dose was similar in both groups, except for swelling (Grade 3) after primary vaccination which was more frequent in children in the vaccine than in the control group (23.7%; 95%CI [19.6-28.1] of doses vs 14.1%; 95% CI [10.9-17.8] of doses). Fifty-nine SAEs (including 8 deaths), none of them related to vaccination, were reported during the entire study. CONCLUSIONS: Three dose primary vaccination with DTPw-HBV/Hib-MenAC was non-inferior to DTPw-HBV/Hib for the 5 common antigens used in the routine EPI schedule and induced bactericidal antibodies against Neisseria meningitidis of serogroups A and C in the majority of infants. Serogroup A and C bactericidal antibody levels had fallen below titres associated with protection in nearly half of the infants by the age of 12 months confirming that a booster dose is required at about that age. An enhanced memory response was shown after polysaccharide challenge. This vaccine could provide protection against 7 important childhood diseases (including meningococcal A and C) and be of particular value in countries of the African meningitis belt. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN35754083

Safety and Immunogenicity of a Malaria Vaccine, Plasmodium falciparum AMA-1/MSP-1 Chimeric Protein Formulated in Montanide ISA 720 in Healthy Adults

The P. falciparum chimeric protein 2.9 (PfCP-2.9) consisting of the sequences of MSP1-19 and AMA-1 (III) is a malaria vaccine candidate that was found to induce inhibitory antibodies in rabbits and monkeys. This was a phase I randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation study to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the PfCP-2.9 formulated with a novel adjuvant Montanide ISA720. Fifty-two subjects were randomly assigned to 4 dose groups of 10 participants, each receiving the test vaccine of 20, 50, 100, or 200 µg respectively, and 1 placebo group of 12 participants receiving the adjuvant only.The vaccine formulation was shown to be safe and well-tolerated, and none of the participants withdrew. The total incidence of local adverse events (AEs) was 75%, distributed among 58% of the placebo group and 80% of those vaccinated. Among the vaccinated, 65% had events that were mild and 15% experienced moderate AEs. Almost all systemic adverse reactions observed in this study were graded as mild and required no therapy. The participants receiving the test vaccine developed detectable antibody responses which were boosted by the repeated vaccinations. Sixty percent of the vaccinated participants had high ELISA titers (>1∶10,000) of antigen-specific antibodies which could also recognize native parasite proteins in an immunofluorescence assay (IFA).This study is the first clinical trial for this candidate and builds on previous investigations supporting PfCP-2.9/ISA720 as a promising blood-stage malaria vaccine. Results demonstrate safety, tolerability (particularly at the lower doses tested) and immunogenicity of the formulation. Further clinical development is ongoing to explore optimizing the dose and schedule of the formulation to decrease reactogenicity without compromising immunogenicity.

MALVAC 2008: Measures of efficacy of malaria vaccines in phase 2b and phase 3 trials--scientific, regulatory and public health perspectives.

The WHO Initiative for Vaccine Research and Global Malaria Programme convened a joint scientific forum in June 2008 to discuss scientific, regulatory and public health perspectives on the measurement of efficacy in malaria vaccine field efficacy trials. Participants included clinical trialists, statisticians and epidemiologists from both developed and developing countries, vaccine researchers and developers from academia and industry, and representatives of regulatory agencies. The efficacy of a vaccine against a disease is a summary indication of the extent to which those vaccinated are protected. However, there are several ways of measuring this and for high incidence diseases, such as malaria, in which there is variation in exposure and susceptibility from person to person, the choice of the appropriate measure of efficacy is more complex than is the case for low incidence diseases. There was agreement amongst statisticians at the meeting that basing analyses on "time to event" is the most appropriate method to analyse both incident infection and clinical malaria data from trials. However, policymakers would need to understand that this measure is different from that based on the proportion event-free up to a defined time, which has been used in reporting clinical challenge trials of malaria vaccines. For the assessment of public health impact, data should be reported on all episodes of malaria that a trial subject experiences, not only first episodes, and on duration of efficacy. Further research is required on the analysis of such multiple episode data. It will also be important to examine end-points such as severe malaria and death, though it may be difficult for the latter to be a primary end-point in trials. In order to compare findings in trials, it was suggested that efficacy estimates are reported at different time intervals after vaccination and that data sharing should be enhanced for all malaria vaccine clinical trials. It was appreciated that the epidemiology of malaria is changing in many settings and this may affect the public health benefit of a newly available malaria vaccine, whose likely impact would have to be assessed in the context of multiple other potential control measures. Research into possible interactions between malaria control measures was highlighted as a priority