The complementary roles of Phase 3 trials and post-licensure surveillance in the evaluation of new vaccines

Vaccines have led to significant reductions in morbidity and saved countless lives from many infectious diseases and are one of the most important public health successes of the modern era. Both vaccines’ effectiveness and safety are keys for the success of immunisation programmes. The role of post-licensure surveillance has become increasingly recognised by regulatory authorities in the overall vaccine development process. Safety, purity, and effectiveness of vaccines are carefully assessed before licensure, but some safety and effectiveness aspects need continuing monitoring after licensure; Post-marketing activities are a necessary complement to pre-licensure activities for monitoring vaccine quality and to inform public health programmes. In the recent past, the availability of large databases together with data-mining and cross-linkage techniques have significantly improved the potentialities of post-licensure surveillance. The scope of this review is to present challenges and opportunities offered by vaccine post-licensure surveillance. While pre-licensure activities form the foundation for the development of effective and safe vaccines, post-licensure monitoring and assessment, are necessary to assure that vaccines are effective and safe when translated in real world settings. Strong partnerships and collaboration at an international level between different stakeholders is necessary for finding and optimally allocating resources and establishing robust post-licensure processes.     

The Brighton Collaboration standardized template for collection of key information for benefit-risk assessment of protein vaccines

Several protein vaccine candidates are among the COVID-19 vaccines in development. The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) has prepared a standardized template to describe the key considerations for the benefit-risk assessment of protein vaccines. This will help key stakeholders to assess potential safety issues and understand the benefit-risk of such a vaccine platform. The structured and standardized assessment provided by the template would also help contribute to improved public acceptance and communication of licensed protein vaccines.     

Data and product needs for influenza immunization programs in low- and middle-income countries: Rationale and main conclusions of the WHO preferred product characteristics for next-generation influenza vaccines

In 2017, WHO convened a working group of global experts to develop the Preferred Product Characteristics (PPC) for Next-Generation Influenza Vaccines. PPCs are intended to encourage innovation in vaccine development. They describe WHO preferences for parameters of vaccines, in particular their indications, target groups, implementation strategies, and clinical data needed for assessment of safety and efficacy. PPCs are shaped by the global unmet public health need in a priority disease area for which WHO encourages vaccine development. These preferences reflect WHO’s mandate to promote the development of vaccines with high public health impact and suitability in Low- and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC). The target audience is all entities intending to develop or to achieve widespread adoption of a specific influenza vaccine product in these settings. The working group determined that existing influenza vaccines are not well suited for LMIC use. While many developed country manufactures and research funders prioritize influenza vaccine products for use in adults and the elderly, most LMICs do not have sufficiently strong health systems to deliver vaccines to these groups. Policy makers from LMICs are expected to place higher value on vaccines indicated for prevention of severe illness, however the clinical development of influenza vaccines focuses on demonstrating prevention of any influenza illness. Many influenza vaccine products do not meet WHO standards for programmatic suitability of vaccines, which introduces challenges when vaccines are used in low-resource settings. And finally, current vaccines do not integrate well with routine immunization programs in LMICs, given age of vaccine licensure, arbitrary expiration dates timed for temperate country markets, and the need for year-round immunization in countries with prolonged influenza seasonality. While all interested parties should refer to the full PPC document for details, in this article we highlight data needs for new influenza vaccines to better demonstrate the value proposition in LMICs.     

Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) standardized template for collection of key information for benefit-risk assessment of live-attenuated viral vaccines

Several live-attenuated viral vaccine candidates are among the COVID-19 vaccines in development. The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) has prepared a standardized template to describe the key considerations for the benefit-risk assessment of live-attenuated viral vaccines. This will help key stakeholders assess potential safety issues and understand the benefit-risk of such vaccines. The standardized and structured assessment provided by the template would also help to contribute to improved communication and support public acceptance of licensed live-attenuated viral vaccines.     

The Brighton Collaboration standardized template for collection of key information for benefit-risk assessment of inactivated viral vaccines

Inactivated viral vaccines have long been used in humans for diseases of global health threat and are now among the vaccines for COVID-19 under development. The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) has prepared a standardized template to describe the key considerations for the benefit-risk assessment of inactivated viral vaccines. This will help key stakeholders to assess potential safety issues and understand the benefit-risk of the vaccine platform. The standardized and structured assessment provided by the template would also help to contribute to improved communication and support public acceptance of licensed inactivated viral vaccines.     

A Brighton Collaboration standardized template with key considerations for a benefit/risk assessment for a soluble glycoprotein vaccine to prevent disease caused by Nipah or Hendra viruses

Auro Vaccines LLC has developed a protein vaccine to prevent disease from Nipah and Hendra virus infection that employs a recombinant soluble Hendra glycoprotein (HeV-sG) adjuvanted with aluminum phosphate. This vaccine is currently under clinical evaluation in a Phase 1 study. The Benefit-Risk Assessment of VAccines by TechnolOgy Working Group (BRAVATO; ex-V3SWG) has prepared a standardized template to describe the key considerations for the benefit-risk assessment of protein vaccines. This will help key stakeholders to assess potential safety issues and understand the benefit-risk of such a vaccine platform. The structured and standardized assessment provided by the template may also help contribute to improved public acceptance and communication of licensed protein vaccines.     

Introducing new vaccines in the poorest countries: what did we learn from the GAVI experience with financial sustainability?

This paper reviews the experience of the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization (GAVI) in introducing hepatitis B and Haemophilus influenzae type b vaccines in the poorest countries, and explores how financing for immunization has changed since GAVI Fund resources were made available during its first wave of support between 2000 and 2006. The analysis of Financial Sustainability Plans in 50 countries allowed for some of the original funding assumptions of the GAVI approach to be tested against the realities in a wide set of countries, and to highlight implications for future immunization efforts. While the initial GAVI experience with financial sustainability has proved successful through the development of plans, and many countries have been able to both introduce new vaccines and mobilize additional financing for immunization, for future GAVI supported vaccine introduction, some country co-financing of these will be needed upfront for the approach to be more sustainable.     

Planning for COVID-19 vaccines safety surveillance

COVID-19 vaccines are the most important tool to stem the pandemic. They are being developed with unprecedented global collaboration and accelerated timelines to achieve WHO Emergency Use Listing, while using regulatory pathways through national regulatory authorities. Alongside preparations to ensure equitable access to the vaccines among people globally, preparations must be made within countries for COVID-19 vaccines safety surveillance on an urgent basis. Safety surveillance must be capable of investigating adverse events of special interest (AESI) and adverse events following immunization to determine a change in the benefit-risk profile of the vaccine, and to be able to anticipate coincidental events that might be attributed to the vaccine.Active surveillance systems should calculate the incidence of background rates of AESI prior to vaccine roll out. These background rates vary tremendously across regions, populations and case ascertainment methods. Active surveillance systems must be established or strengthened now, (including in LMIC), to calculate the background rates. Utilizing standardized case definitions and global standards for AESI will help in harmonization. Vaccine safety communication plans should be developed. Expanding the global vaccine safety system to meet the needs of COVID-19 and other emergency and routine use vaccines is a priority currently.     

Operational lessons learned in conducting a multi-country collaboration for vaccine safety signal verification and hypothesis testing: The global vaccine safety multi country collaboration initiative

Timely and effective evaluation of vaccine safety signals for newly developed vaccines introduced in low and middle- income countries (LMICs) is essential. The study tested the development of a global network of hospital-based sentinel sites for vaccine safety signal verification and hypothesis testing. Twenty-six sentinel sites in sixteen countries across all WHO regions participated, and 65% of the sites were from LMIC. We describe the process for the establishment and operationalization of such a network and the lessons learned in conducting a multi-country collaborative initiative. 24 out of the 26 sites successfully contributed data for the global analysis using standardised tools and procedures. Our study successfully confirmed the well-known risk estimates for the outcomes of interest. The main challenges faced by investigators were lack of adequate information in the medical records for case ascertainment and classification, and access to immunization data. The results suggest that sentinel hospitals intending to participate in vaccine safety studies strengthen their systems for discharge diagnosis coding, medical records and linkage to vaccination data. Our study confirms that a multi-country hospital-based network initiative for vaccine safety monitoring is feasible and demonstrates the validity and utility of large collaborative international studies to monitor the safety of new vaccines introduced in LMICs.     

Landscape analysis of pharmacovigilance and related practices among 34 vaccine manufacturers’ from emerging countries

Developing Countries’ Vaccine Manufacturers Network was tasked with the strategic goal of seeking solutions, jointly with manufacturers, for enabling the stable, sustainable supply of quality vaccines to developing countries to increase global immunization. As vaccines are given to millions of healthy people, including children, to prevent life-threatening diseases, vaccines must meet high safety standards. Vaccine safety monitoring is of paramount importance to maintain trust in vaccination programs globally. Once a vaccine is licensed and recommended for use, its safety and effectiveness must be monitored during its whole lifecycle, as the safety profile and protective effectiveness may change over time. A well-established safety governance model across the organization with underlying processes for data collection, signal and risk management and communication is essential. A “fit for purpose” pharmacovigilance system may vary as it depends on several factors. However, all vaccine manufacturers strive to achieve a pharmacovigilance system satisfying Good Pharmacovigilance Practices, in compliance with national, international and supranational requirements, as applicable.A landscape analysis, using a questionnaire covering nine pharmacovigilance key areas related to an effective system, was conducted to understand the existing pharmacovigilance structures, practices and expertise of vaccine manufacturers from emerging countries, on an institutional level. 34 of the 43 contacted manufacturers participated voluntarily. The survey results show that all respondents have established vaccine safety capacity, mainly in collecting and handling adverse events following immunization and implementing standardized processes; the survey also shows differences in the maturity of the manufacturers’ pharmacovigilance system, Quality Management System, signal and risk management, and safety governance. The analysis provides a tool for manufacturers to gain a “bird's-eye” view of the structure of pharmacovigilance key areas and the operational dimensions covered by each area, to benchmarking against international expectations, serving as a basis to further strengthen pharmacovigilance systems, to support accelerated global vaccine supply.     

Stakeholders’ perceptions of 10 years of the Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines (GAP) – Results from a survey

Ten years after the launch of the Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines (GAP), the World Health Organization (WHO) surveyed stakeholders to understand their perceptions of what the programme had achieved. This article provides a summary of the findings; the full report will be available on-line on the GAP website in November 2016 (http://www.who.int/influenza_vaccines_plan/en/). Seventy-seven responses were received from stakeholders including medical doctors, national influenza center officials, country immunization programme teams, surveillance and disease centers, policy-makers, researchers, vaccine manufacturers, and non-governmental organizations from 28 countries, representing all six WHO regions.Respondents cited GAP’s biggest successes as capacity building in developing countries; raising international awareness of global needs in the event of a pandemic; and collaborative alignment of influenza stakeholders. The most commonly reported challenges were the limited progress in development of a broadly protective or universal vaccine and the perceived absence of a major increase in seasonal demand. These findings aligned with the perception that less global progress had been made under the third GAP objective, focused on research and development of better vaccines, than on increasing seasonal vaccine use (objective 1) and pandemic vaccine production capacity (objective 2). Respondents explained what they saw as the major challenges to development of better vaccines, including to development of a universal influenza vaccine. The majority of respondents agreed that the goal chosen at the GAP II consultation is still relevant. Results highlighted the importance of promoting research and development of better vaccines, both for facilitating uptake of seasonal vaccines and for ensuring timely vaccine availability in the event of a pandemic. As the GAP concludes its mandate this year, these findings will contribute to discussions on the impact of programme closure and how to address the key issues facing influenza stakeholders thereafter.     

The Brighton Collaboration standardized template for collection of key information for benefit-risk assessment of nucleic acid (RNA and DNA) vaccines

Nucleic acid (DNA and RNA) vaccines are among the most advanced vaccines for COVID-19 under development. The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) has prepared a standardized template to describe the key considerations for the benefit-risk assessment of nucleic acid vaccines. This will facilitate the assessment by key stakeholders of potential safety issues and understanding of overall benefit-risk. The structured assessment provided by the template can also help improve communication and public acceptance of licensed nucleic acid vaccines.     

Maternal immunization – Promises and concerns

In this issue of Vaccine, the maternal immunization platform as an approach to protect mothers and infants against diverse pathogens is presented. Potential vaccine targets and the safety, science, trial designs, ethical considerations, and international perspectives focusing on low and middle income countries (LMIC) are discussed. This information provides a timely update because maternal immunization is increasingly being considered as an intervention to prevent maternal and/or neonatal disease. Prioritization of vaccine targets for maternal immunization by researchers, public health officials and health care workers needs to begin now.     

Implementing vaccination policies based upon scientific evidence in Japan

The theme of the 24th Annual Meeting of the Japanese Society for Vaccinology was “Sustainable Future Medical Care Created by Vaccines.” This theme includes topics such as the proposal to reduce the medical costs incurred by societies with aging populations through prophylactic vaccination. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic alerted us to the important roles that preventive measures, such as vaccines, play in fighting infectious diseases. In order to inform the public of the benefits of vaccines, it is important to provide society with information regarding new vaccine developments, adjuvants, the cost–benefit ratio of vaccine introduction, and vaccine effectiveness and safety. Clinical research is essential for obtaining evidence of vaccine effectiveness and safety. The United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) conducts active surveillance in defined areas before and after the introduction of vaccines and documents the reduction in infection rates as a measure of vaccine effectiveness. However, vaccine efficacy and side effects may vary by country and ethnicity. Therefore, it is necessary for individual countries to develop their own evidence-based surveillance programs. We have studied vaccine efficacy and documented side-effects observed in patients for the varicella and rotavirus vaccines in Japan. This review outlines the importance of providing scientific evidence for vaccine effectiveness and safety.     

Vaccine safety evaluation: Practical aspects in assessing benefits and risks

Vaccines are different from most medicines in that they are administered to large and mostly healthy populations including infants and children, so there is a low tolerance for potential risks or side-effects. In addition, the long-term benefits of immunisation in reducing or eliminating infectious diseases may induce complacency due to the absence of cases. However, as demonstrated in recent measles outbreaks in Europe and United States, reappearance of the disease occurs as soon as vaccine coverage falls. Unfounded vaccine scares such as those associating the combined measles-mumps-rubella vaccine with autism, and whole-cell pertussis vaccines with encephalopathy, can also have massive impacts, resulting in reduced vaccine uptake and disease resurgence. The safety assessment of vaccines is exhaustive and continuous; beginning with non-clinical evaluation of their individual components in terms of purity, stability and sterility, continuing throughout the clinical development phase and entire duration of use of the vaccine; including post-approval. The breadth and depth of safety assessments conducted at multiple levels by a range of independent organizations increases confidence in the rigour with which any potential risks or side-effects are investigated and managed. Industry, regulatory agencies, academia, the medical community and the general public all play a role in monitoring vaccine safety. Within these stakeholder groups, the healthcare professional and vaccine provider have key roles in the prevention, identification, investigation and management of adverse events following immunisation (AEFI). Guidelines and algorithms aid in determining whether AEFI may have been caused by the vaccine, or whether it is coincidental to it. Healthcare providers are encouraged to rigorously investigate AEFIs and to report them via local reporting processes. The ultimate objective for all parties is to ensure vaccines have a favourable benefit-risk profile.     

Global production capacity of seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines in 2019

Vaccines will be an important element in mitigating the impact of an influenza pandemic. While research towards developing universal influenza vaccines is ongoing, the current strategy for vaccine supply in a pandemic relies on seasonal influenza vaccine production to be switched over to pandemic vaccines. Understanding how much vaccine could be produced, in which regions of the world and in what timeframe is critical to informing influenza pandemic preparedness. Through the Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines, 2006–2016, WHO promoted an increase in vaccine production capacity and monitors the landscape through periodically surveying influenza vaccine manufacturers. This study compares global capacity for production of influenza vaccines in 2019 with estimates from previous surveys; provides an overview of countries with established production facilities; presents vaccine production by type and manufacturing process; and discusses limitations to these estimates. Results of the current survey show that estimated annual seasonal influenza vaccine production capacity changed little since 2015 increasing from 1.47 billion to 1.48 billion doses with potential maximum annual influenza pandemic vaccine production capacity increasing from 6.37 billion to 8.31 billion doses. However, this figure should be interpreted with caution as it presents a best-case scenario with several assumptions which may impact supply. Further, pandemic vaccines would not be immediately available and could take four to six months for first supplies with several more months needed to reach maximum capacity. A moderate-case scenario is also presented of 4.15 billion doses of pandemic vaccine in 12 months. It is important to note that two doses of pandemic vaccine are likely to be required to elicit an adequate immune response. Continued efforts are needed to ensure the sustainability of this production and to conduct research for vaccines that are faster to produce and more broadly protective taking into account lessons learned from COVID-19 vaccine development.     

17D yellow fever vaccines: new insights. A report of a workshop held during the World Congress on medicine and health in the tropics, Marseille, France, Monday 12 September 2005

Yellow fever (YF) is a major health problem in endemic regions of Africa and South America. It also poses a serious health risk to travellers to areas with endemic disease. Currently, there is no effective drug treatment for YF; however, 17D YF vaccines have demonstrated high rates of effectiveness and good safety profiles. This workshop was organized to review key data and issues about YF disease and currently available 17D YF vaccines. Starting with an overview of the current disease epidemiology in Africa and South America and a review of the safety data of 17D YF vaccines, data were then presented demonstrating the genetic stability of multiple production lots of a 17D YF vaccine, the immunological responses of healthy subjects post-vaccination and the long-term immunogenicity of 17D YF vaccines. Finally, the findings of the molecular characterization of 17D YF virus sub-strains recovered from rare, fatal cases of post-vaccination serious adverse events were presented. There was unanimous agreement that current 17D YF vaccines have a highly favourable benefit-risk profile when used in persons at risk of exposure to the YF virus, and that appropriate use of 17D YF vaccines will minimize the occurrence of serious adverse events post-vaccination.     

Evidence based vaccinology

Evidence based vaccinology (EBV) is the identification and use of the best evidence in making and implementing decisions during all of the stages of the life of a vaccine, including pre-licensure vaccine development and post-licensure manufacture and research, and utilization of the vaccine for disease control. Vaccines, unlike most pharmaceuticals, are in a continuous process of development both before and after licensure. Changes in biologics manufacturing technology and changes that vaccines induce in population and disease biology lead to periodic review of regimens (and sometimes dosage) based on changing immunologic data or public perceptions relevant to vaccine safety and effectiveness. EBV includes the use of evidence based medicine (EBM) both in clinical trials and in national disease containment programs. The rationale for EBV is that the highest evidentiary standards are required to maintain a rigorous scientific basis of vaccine quality control in manufacture and to ensure valid determination of vaccine efficacy, field effectiveness and safety profiles (including post-licensure safety monitoring), cost-benefit analyses, and risk:benefit ratios. EBV is increasingly based on statistically validated, clearly defined laboratory, manufacturing, clinical and epidemiological research methods and procedures, codified as good laboratory practices (GLP), good manufacturing practices (GMP), good clinical research practices (GCRP) and in clinical and public health practice (good vaccination practices, GVP). Implementation demands many data-driven decisions made by a spectrum of specialists pre- and post-licensure, and is essential to maintaining public confidence in vaccines.     

The GAVI Financing Task Force: One model of partner collaboration

The Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, now called the GAVI Alliance, was launched in 2000 as a coalition of partners, including countries, international organizations, bilateral donors, the vaccine production industry, and nongovernmental organizations; most activities were to be implemented through these partner organizations. Four task forces were established at the outset to define issues relevant to GAVI Alliance goals and to recommend actions. This paper describes the innovations and outputs of the Financing Task Force (FTF), which worked in three areas: country support to sustainably finance vaccines and immunization programs in the context of introducing new vaccines; vaccine supply and demand issues as they impact vaccine choice, production costs and price/dose; innovative financing mechanisms for vaccines and immunization programs through, for example, capital markets. This analysis particularly focuses on the FTF's work on financial sustainability. Through its partnership, the FTF was able to leverage organizational change in its participating organizations, in the countries supported by the GAVI Alliance, and in the policies of GAVI itself. These achievements, along with areas where the desired outcome was not achieved, are summarized with lessons that may be useful to other multi-partner health alliances.