The RTS,S malaria vaccine

RTS,S is the most advanced candidate vaccine against human malaria. During its remarkable journey from conception and design in the early 1980s to the multicenter Phase 3 trial currently underway across sub-Saharan Africa, RTS,S has overcome tremendous challenges and disproved established vaccine paradigms. In the last several years, Phase 2 studies conducted in infants and children in endemic areas have established the efficacy of RTS,S for reducing morbidity due to clinical malaria. If the results are realized in the Phase 3 trial, the chances for licensure in the near future appear high. Such progress is all the more remarkable given our lack of clear understanding regarding how the vaccine activates the human immune system, the immune correlates of protection or the mechanism whereby a vaccine targeting sporozoites and liver stage parasites can reduce the clinical disease associated with parasitemia. These unanswered questions pose important challenges to be addressed in the quest to understand the protection afforded by RTS,S and to build a more efficacious second generation vaccine against malaria. This review will focus on current knowledge about the protective efficacy of RTS,S and what we have learned regarding its impact on the human immune system.     

RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine induces IgA responses against CSP and vaccine-unrelated antigens in African children in the phase 3 trial

BackgroundThe evaluation of immune responses to RTS,S/AS01 has traditionally focused on immunoglobulin (Ig) G antibodies that are only moderately associated with protection. The role of other antibody isotypes that could also contribute to vaccine efficacy remains unclear. Here we investigated whether RTS,S/AS01_E elicits antigen-specific serum IgA antibodies to the vaccine and other malaria antigens, and we explored their association with protection.MethodsNinety-five children (age 5–17 months old at first vaccination) from the RTS,S/AS01_E phase 3 clinical trial who received 3 doses of RTS,S/AS01_E or a comparator vaccine were selected for IgA quantification 1 month post primary immunization. Two sites with different malaria transmission intensities (MTI) and clinical malaria cases and controls, were included. Measurements of IgA against different constructs of the circumsporozoite protein (CSP) vaccine antigen and 16 vaccine-unrelated Plasmodium falciparum antigens were performed using a quantitative suspension array assay.ResultsRTS,S vaccination induced a 1.2 to 2-fold increase in levels of serum/plasma IgA antibodies to all CSP constructs, which was not observed upon immunization with a comparator vaccine. The IgA response against 13 out of 16 vaccine-unrelated P. falciparum antigens also increased after vaccination, and levels were higher in recipients of RTS,S than in comparators. IgA levels to malaria antigens before vaccination were more elevated in the high MTI than the low MTI site. No statistically significant association of IgA with protection was found in exploratory analyses.ConclusionsRTS,S/AS01_E induces IgA responses in peripheral blood against CSP vaccine antigens and other P. falciparum vaccine-unrelated antigens, similar to what we previously showed for IgG responses. Collectively, data warrant further investigation of the potential contribution of vaccine-induced IgA responses to efficacy and any possible interplay, either synergistic or antagonistic, with protective IgG, as identifying mediators of protection by RTS,S/AS01_E immunization is necessary for the design of improved second-generation vaccines.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT008666191.     

Case reduction and cost-effectiveness of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine alongside bed nets in Lilongwe,Malawi

BackgroundRTS,S/AS01, the most advanced vaccine against malaria, is now undergoing pilot implementation in Malawi, Ghana, and Kenya where an estimated 360,000 children will be vaccinated each year. In this study we evaluate RTS,S/AS01 alongside bed net use and estimate cost-effectiveness.MethodsRTS,S/AS01 phase III trial and bed net prevalence data were used to determine the effect of vaccination in the urban/periurban and rural areas of Lilongwe, Malawi. Cost data were used to calculate the cost-effectiveness of various interventions over three years.FindingsSince bed nets reduce malaria incidence and homogeneous vaccine efficacy was assumed, participants without bed nets received greater relative benefit from vaccination with RTS,S/AS01 than participants with bed nets. Similarly, since malaria incidence in rural Lilongwe is higher than in urban Lilongwe, the impact and cost-effectiveness of vaccine interventions is increased in rural areas. In rural Lilongwe, we estimated that vaccinating one child without a bed net would prevent 2·59 (1·62 to 3·38) cases of malaria over three years, corresponding to a cost of $10·08 (7·71 to 16·13) per case averted. Alternatively, vaccinating one child with a bed net would prevent 1·59 (0·87 to 2·57) cases, corresponding to $16·43 (10·16 to 30·06) per case averted. Providing RTS,S/AS01 to 30,000 children in rural Lilongwe was estimated to cost $782,400 and to prevent 58,611 (35,778 to 82,932) cases of malaria over a three-year period. Joint interventions providing both vaccination and bed nets (to those without them) were estimated to prevent additional cases of malaria and to be similarly cost-effective, compared to vaccine-only interventions.InterpretationTo maximize malaria prevention, vaccination and bed net distribution programs could be integrated.FundingImpacts of Environment, Host Genetics and Antigen Diversity on Malaria Vaccine Efficacy (1R01AI137410-01)     

Cost of introducing and delivering RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine within the malaria vaccine implementation program

BackgroundThe World Health Organization (WHO) recommended widespread use of the RTS,S/AS01 (RTS,S) malaria vaccine among children residing in regions of moderate to high malaria transmission. This recommendation is informed by RTS,S evidence, including findings from the pilot rollout of the vaccine in Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi. This study estimates the incremental costs of introducing and delivering the malaria vaccine within routine immunization programs in the context of malaria vaccine pilot introduction, to help inform decision-making.MethodsAn activity-based, retrospective costing was conducted from the governments’ perspective. Vaccine introduction and delivery costs supported by the donors during the pilot introduction were attributed as costs to the governments under routine implementation. Detailed resource use data were extracted from the pilot program expenditure and activity reports for 2019–2021. Primary data from representative health facilities were collected to inform recurrent operational and service delivery costs. Costs were categorized as introduction or recurrent costs. Both financial and economic costs were estimated and reported in 2020 USD. The cost of donated vaccine doses was evaluated at $2, $5 and $10 per dose and included in the economic cost estimates. Financial costs include the procurement add on costs for the donated vaccines and immunization supplies, along with other direct expenses.FindingsAt a vaccine price of $5 per dose, the incremental cost per dose administered across countries ranges from $2.30 to $3.01 (financial), and $8.28 to $10.29 (economic). The non-vaccine cost of delivery ranges between $1.04 and $2.46 (financial) and $1.52 and $4.62 (economic), by country. Considering only recurrent costs, the non-vaccine cost of delivery per dose ranges between $0.29 and $0.89 (financial) and $0.59 and $2.29 (economic), by country. Introduction costs constitute between 33% and 71% of total financial costs. Commodity and procurement add-on costs are the main cost drivers of total cost across countries. Incremental resource needs for implementation are dependent on country’s baseline immunization program capacity constraints.InterpretationThe financial costs of introducing RTS,S are comparable with costs of introducing other new vaccines. Country resource requirements for malaria vaccine introduction are most influenced by vaccine price and potential donor funding for vaccine purchases and introduction support.     

Decrease in circulating CD25hiFoxp3+ regulatory T cells following vaccination with the candidate malaria vaccine RTS,S

Regulatory T (Treg) cells have been shown in some cases to limit vaccine-specific immune responses and impact efficacy. Very little is known about the regulatory responses to the leading malaria vaccine candidate, RTS,S. The goal of this study was to begin to characterize the regulatory responses to the RTS,S vaccine. Using multi-parameter flow cytometry, we examined responses in 13 malaria naïve adult volunteers who received 2 doses of RTS,S given eight weeks apart. Five of these volunteers had previously received 3 doses of a candidate DNA-CSP vaccine, with the final dose given approximately one year prior to the first dose of the RTS,S vaccine.We found that the frequency of CD25^hiFoxp3⁺ Treg cells decreased following administration of RTS,S (p = 0.0195), with no differences based on vaccine regimen. There was a concomitant decrease in CTLA-4 expression on CD25^hiFoxp3⁺ Treg cells (p = 0.0093) and PD-1 levels on CD8⁺ T cells (p = 0.0002). Additionally, the frequency of anergic CTLA-4⁺CCR7⁺ T cells decreased following vaccination. An inverse correlation was observed between the frequency of Plasmodium falciparum circumsporozoite protein (PfCSP)-specific IFN-γ and PfCSP-specific IL-10, as well as an inverse correlation between IL-10 induced by Hepatitis B surface antigen, the carrier of RTS,S, and PfCSP-specific IFN-γ, suggesting that immunity against the vaccine backbone could impact vaccine immunogenicity. These results have implications for future malaria vaccine design.     

RTS,S malaria vaccine efficacy and immunogenicity during Plasmodium falciparum challenge is associated with HLA genotype

Although RTS,S remains the most advanced malaria vaccine, the factors influencing differences in vaccine immunogenicity or efficacy between individuals or populations are still poorly characterised. The analyses of genetic determinants of immunogenicity have previously been restricted by relatively small sample sizes from individual trials. Here we combine data from six Phase II RTS,S trials and evaluate the relationship between HLA allele groups and RTS,S-mediated protection in controlled human malaria infections (CHMI), using multivariate logistic or linear regression. We observed significant associations between three allele groups (HLA-A¹01, HLA-B¹08, and HLA-DRB1¹15/¹16) and protection, while another three allele groups (HLA-A¹03, HLA-B¹53, and HLA-DRB1¹07) were significantly associated with lack of protection. It is noteworthy that these ‘protective’ allele groups are thought to be at a lower prevalence in sub-Saharan African populations than in the UK or USA where these Phase II trials occurred. Taken together, the analyses presented here give an indication that HLA genotype may influence RTS,S-mediated protective efficacy against malaria infection.     

Four year immunogenicity of the RTS,S/AS02(A) malaria vaccine in Mozambican children during a phase IIb trial

Previous studies with the malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS02_A in young children in a malaria endemic area of Mozambique have shown it to have a promising safety profile and to reduce the risk of Plasmodium falciparum infection and disease.In this study, we assessed the antibody responses to the P. falciparum and hepatitis B components of the RTS,S/AS02_A vaccine over a 45 months surveillance period in a large phase IIb trial which included 2022 children aged 1-4 years at recruitment.The RTS,S/AS02_A vaccine induced high anti-circumsporozoite antibody levels with at least 96% of children remaining seropositive during the entire follow-up period. IgG titers decayed over the first 6 months of follow-up to about 25% of the initial level, but still remained 30-fold higher until month 45 compared to controls. Children with higher levels of naturally acquired immunity at baseline, assessed by blood stage indirect fluorescent antibody test, had slightly higher anti-circumsporozoite levels, after adjusting for the effect of age.The RTS,S/AS02_A vaccine also induced high levels of anti-hepatitis B surface antigen antibodies (seroprotection >97%).RTS,S/AS02_A vaccine is immunogenic and induces long-lasting anti-circumsporozoite antibodies, persisting at least 42 months after immunization. These antibodies may play a role in protection against malaria.     

Modelling the relative cost-effectiveness of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine compared to investment in vector control or chemoprophylaxis

BackgroundThe World Health Organization has recommended a 4-dose schedule of the RTS,S/AS01 (RTS,S) vaccine for children in regions of moderate to high P. falciparum transmission. Faced with limited supply and finite resources, global funders and domestic malaria control programs will need to examine the relative cost-effectiveness of RTS,S and identify target areas for vaccine implementation relative to scale-up of existing interventions.MethodsUsing an individual-based mathematical model of P. falciparum, we modelled the cost-effectiveness of RTS,S across a range of settings in sub-Saharan Africa, incorporating various rainfall patterns, insecticide-treated net (ITN) use, treatment coverage, and parasite prevalence bands. We compare age-based and seasonal RTS,S administration to increasing ITN usage, switching to next generation ITNs in settings experiencing insecticide-resistance, and introduction of seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) in areas of seasonal transmission.ResultsFor RTS,S to be the most cost-effective intervention option considered, the maximum cost per dose was less than $9.30 USD in 90.9% of scenarios. Nearly all (89.8%) values at or above $9.30 USD per dose were in settings with 60% established bed net use and / or with established SMC, and 76.3% were in the highest PfPR_2-10 band modelled (40%). Addition of RTS,S to strategies involving 60% ITN use, increased ITN usage or a switch to PBO nets, and SMC, if eligible, still led to significant marginal case reductions, with a median of 2,653 (IQR: 1,741 to 3,966) cases averted per 100,000 people annually, and 82,270 (IQR: 54,034 to 123,105) cases averted per 100,000 fully vaccinated children (receiving at least three doses).ConclusionsUse of RTS,S results in reductions in malaria cases and deaths even when layered upon existing interventions. When comparing relative cost-effectiveness, scale up of ITNs, introduction of SMC, and switching to new technology nets should be prioritized in eligible settings.     

Duration of vaccine efficacy against malaria: 5th year of follow-up in children vaccinated with RTS,S/AS02 in Mozambique

A primary concern for the RTS,S malaria vaccine candidate is duration of protection. The ongoing Phase III trial reported evidence of waning efficacy within the first year following vaccination. Multiple Phase IIb trials demonstrated early waning of efficacy. The longest duration of protection for RTS,S recorded to date was in a trial of a cohort of 1605 Mozambican children age 1–4 yr at the time of immunization (C1), which showed an overall efficacy against clinical malaria of 30.5% over 43 subsequent months of surveillance. A significant reduction in parasite prevalence in RTS,S vaccinees indicated that the vaccine continued to protect at the end of this period. Although follow-up for recording incident cases of clinical malaria was stopped at 45 months, we were interested in evidence of further durability of protection, and revisited the cohort at 63 months, recording the secondary trial endpoint, prevalence of asexual Plasmodium falciparum parasitemia, in the RTS,S and comparator vaccine groups as a proxy for efficacy. As a comparator, we also visited the contemporaneous cohort of 417 children (C2), which showed waning efficacy after 6 months of follow-up. We also assessed anti-circumsporozoite antibody titers. These results were compared with those of other Phase IIb trials. Prevalence of parasitemia was not significantly lower in the RTS,S/AS02 group compared to comparator groups in C1 (57 [119%] Vs 62 [128%]; p = 0.696) or C2 (30 [226%] Vs 35 [276%]; p = 0.391), despite elevated antibody titers, suggesting that protection did not extend to 5 years after vaccination. This is in contrast to the earlier assessment of parasitemia in C1, where a 34% lower prevalence of parasitemia was observed in the RTS,S/AS02 group at month 45. Comparison with other Phase II trials highlights a complex relationship between efficacy, age and transmission intensity. RTS,S/AS02 provided partial protection from clinical malaria for at least 3.5 years in C1. Duration of protection may depend on environmental circumstances, such as changing malaria transmission, and special attention should be given in the Phase III trial to identifying factors that modify longevity of protection.     

Modelling the roles of antibody titre and avidity in protection from Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection following RTS,S/AS01 vaccination

Anti-circumsporozoite antibody titres have been established as an essential indicator for evaluating the immunogenicity and protective capacity of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine. However, a new delayed-fractional dose regime of the vaccine was recently shown to increase vaccine efficacy, from 62.5% (95% CI 29.4–80.1%) under the original dosing schedule to 86.7% (95% CI, 66.8–94.6%) without a corresponding increase in antibody titres. Here we reanalyse the antibody data from this challenge trial to determine whether IgG avidity may help to explain efficacy better than IgG titre alone by adapting a within-host mathematical model of sporozoite inoculation. We demonstrate that a model incorporating titre and avidity provides a substantially better fit to the data than titre alone. These results also suggest that in individuals with a high antibody titre response that also show high avidity (both metrics in the top tercile of observed values) delayed-fractional vaccination provided near perfect protection upon first challenge (98.2% [95% Credible Interval 91.6–99.7%]). This finding suggests that the quality of the vaccine induced antibody response is likely to be an important determinant in the development of highly efficacious pre-erythrocytic vaccines against malaria.     

A phase IIA extension study evaluating the effect of booster vaccination with a fractional dose of RTS,S/AS01E in a controlled human malaria infection challenge

BackgroundWe previously demonstrated that RTS,S/AS01_B and RTS,S/AS01_E vaccination regimens including at least one delayed fractional dose can protect against Plasmodium falciparum malaria in a controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) model, and showed inferiority of a two-dose versus three-dose regimen. In this follow-on trial, we evaluated whether fractional booster vaccination extended or induced protection in previously protected (P-Fx) or non-protected (NP-Fx) participants.Methods49 participants (P-Fx: 25; NP-Fx: 24) received a fractional (1/5th dose-volume) RTS,S/AS01_E booster 12 months post-primary regimen. They underwent P. falciparum CHMI three weeks later and were then followed for six months for safety and immunogenicity.ResultsOverall vaccine efficacy against re-challenge was 53% (95% CI: 37–65%), and similar for P-Fx (52% [95% CI: 28–68%]) and NP-Fx (54% [95% CI: 29–70%]). Efficacy appeared unaffected by primary regimen or previous protection status. Anti-CS (repeat region) antibody geometric mean concentrations (GMCs) increased post-booster vaccination. GMCs were maintained over time in primary three-dose groups but declined in the two-dose group. Protection after re-challenge was associated with higher anti-CS antibody responses. The booster was well-tolerated.ConclusionsA fractional RTS,S/AS01_E booster given one year after completion of a primary two- or three-dose RTS,S/AS01 delayed fractional dose regimen can extend or induce protection against CHMI.Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03824236.A video linked to this article can be found on the Research Data as well as Figshare https://figshare.com/s/ee025150f9d1ac739361     

Costing RTS,S introduction in Burkina Faso,Ghana, Kenya,Senegal, Tanzania,and Uganda: A generalizable approach drawing on publicly available data

Recent results from the phase 3 trial of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine show that the vaccine induced partial protection against clinical malaria in infants and children; given the high burden of the disease it is currently considered for use in malaria endemic countries. To inform adoption decisions the paper proposes a generalizable methodology to estimate the cost of vaccine introduction using routinely collected and publicly available data from the cMYP, UNICEF, and WHO-CHOICE. Costing is carried out around a set of generic activities, assumptions, and inputs for delivery of immunization services adapted to a given country and deployment modality to capture among other factors the structure of the EPI program, distribution model, geography, and demographics particular to the setting. The methodology is applied to estimate the cost of RTS,S introduction in Burkina Faso, Ghana, Kenya, Senegal, Tanzania, and Uganda. At an assumed vaccine price of $5 per dose and given our assumptions on coverage and deployment strategy, we estimate total economic program costs for a 6–9 months cohort within $23.11–$28.28 per fully vaccinated child across the 6 countries. Net of procurement, costs at country level are substantial; for instance in Tanzania these could add as much as $4.2 million per year or an additional $2.4 per infant depending on the level of spare capacity in the system. Differences in cost of vaccine introduction across countries are primarily driven by differences in cost of labour. Overall estimates generated with the methodology result in costs within the ranges reported for other new vaccines introduced in SSA and capture multiple sources of heterogeneity in costs across countries. Further validation with data from field trials will support use of the methodology while also serving as a validation for cMYP and WHO-CHOICE as resources for costing health interventions in the region.     

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

BackgroundWe 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.MethodsInfants 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 anti-circumsporozoite (CS) antibodies were assessed.ResultsOf 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 vaccination-related. 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).ConclusionsThe 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.Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00866619.     

Prevalence,determinants, and reasons for malaria vaccine hesitancy among caregivers of under-five children in Nigeria: Results from a nationwide cross-sectional survey

ObjectiveMalaria contributes to an enormous global burden of disease and mortality, especially in children. Approximately one in every four global cases and deaths from malaria occurs in Nigeria. This study aims to evaluate the prevalence and correlates of community hesitancy to the malaria vaccine, including the reasons for the hesitancy, following the approval of the RTS,S malaria vaccine by the World Health Organization (WHO).MethodsThis was a nationwide cross-sectional online survey of Nigerian adults conducted from 20th October to 30th November 2021. Participants who replied ‘no' or ‘maybe’ to a question assessing their willingness to accept the RTS,S malaria vaccine were considered “hesitant”. We fit a multivariate logistic regression model to report the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) for the factors associated with vaccine hesitancy.FindingsAmong 3377 total respondents (1961 [57.86 %] males; mean age [SD]: 30[9.1]), 1010 (29.91 %) were hesitant. Receiving information about the RTS,S malaria vaccine initially from healthcare workers (vs. the internet) (aOR:0.55; 95 % CI:0.35–0.87) was significantly associated with lower odds of hesitancy. Conversely, earning a high income of over NGN100, 000 (vs. < NGN 30,000) per month (aOR: 2.10, 95 % CI: 1.36–3.24), belonging to other religious groups (vs. Islam) (aOR:3.25, 95 % CI:1.18–8.98), and having a family size of more than ten (vs. < 5) (aOR:1.84; 95 % CI:1.08–3.13) were significantly associated with a higher odds of hesitancy. The main reasons for vaccine hesitancy included fear of vaccine adverse effects (34.95 %), availability of other malaria preventive measures (33.96 %) and not seeing the positive effect of the vaccine in others first (32.97 %).ConclusionThe findings of this survey provide a valuable blueprint for the development of targeted interventions to facilitate caregiver acceptance of the RTS,S vaccine.     

The potential cost-effectiveness of adding a human papillomavirus vaccine to the cervical cancer screening programme in South Africa

This study was designed to answer the question of whether a cervical cancer prevention programme that incorporates a human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine is potentially more cost-effective than the current strategy of screening alone in South Africa. We developed a static Markov state transition model to describe the screening and management of cervical cancer within the South African context. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of adding HPV vaccination to the screening programme ranged from US $1078 to 1460 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained and US$3320–4495 per life year saved, mainly depending on whether the study was viewed from a health service or a societal perspective. Using discounted costs and benefits, the threshold analysis indicated that a vaccine price reduction of 60% or more would make the vaccine plus screening strategy more cost-effective than the screening only approach. To address the issue of affordability and cost-effectiveness, the pharmaceutical companies need to make a commitment to price reductions.     

Immunogenicity and safety of the candidate RTS,S/AS01 vaccine in young Nigerian children: A randomized,double-blind,lot-to-lot consistency trial

Background

For regulatory approval, consistency in manufacturing of vaccine lots is expected to be demonstrated in confirmatory immunogenicity studies using two-sided equivalence trials. This randomized, double-blind study (NCT01323972) assessed consistency of three RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine batches formulated from commercial-scale purified antigen bulk lots in terms of anti-CS-responses induced.

Methods

Healthy children aged 5–17 months were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive RTS,S/AS01 at 0-1-2 months from one of three commercial-scale purified antigen bulk lots (1600 litres-fermentation scale; commercial-scale lots), or a comparator vaccine batch made from pilot-scale purified antigen bulk lot (20 litres-fermentation scale; pilot-scale lot). The co-primary objectives were to first demonstrate consistency of antibody responses against circumsporozoite (CS) protein at one month post-dose 3 for the three commercial-scale lots and second demonstrate non-inferiority of anti-CS antibody responses at one month post-dose 3 for the commercial-scale lots compared to the pilot-scale lot. Safety and reactogenicity were evaluated as secondary endpoints.

Results

One month post-dose-3, anti-CS antibody geometric mean titres (GMT) for the 3 commercial scale lots were 319.6 EU/ml (95% confidence interval (CI): 268.9–379.8), 241.4 EU/ml (207.6–280.7), and 302.3 EU/ml (259.4–352.3). Consistency for the RTS,S/AS01 commercial-scale lots was demonstrated as the two-sided 95% CI of the anti-CS antibody GMT ratio between each pair of lots was within the range of 0.5–2.0. GMT of the pooled commercial-scale lots (285.8 EU/ml (260.7–313.3)) was non-inferior to the pilot-scale lot (271.7 EU/ml (228.5–323.1)). Each RTS,S/AS01 lot had an acceptable tolerability profile, with infrequent reports of grade 3 solicited symptoms. No safety signals were identified and no serious adverse events were considered related to vaccination.

Conclusions

RTS,S/AS01 lots formulated from commercial-scale purified antigen bulk batches induced a consistent anti-CS antibody response, and the anti-CS GMT of pooled commercial-scale lots was non-inferior to that of a lot formulated from a pilot-scale antigen bulk batch.     

Safety and immunogenicty of RTS,S/AS02A candidate malaria vaccine in Gambian children

RTS,S/AS02A is a pre-erythrocytic malaria vaccine candidate in which a portion of the circumsporozoite surface protein (CSP) of Plasmodium falciparum is genetically linked to hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) coexpressed in yeast with unfused HBsAg. The resulting particulate antigen is formulated with the adjuvant system AS02A. We have initiated the paediatric clinical development of this vaccine by conducting two sequential Phase I studies in children: a study in older children (6--11 years), followed by a second study in younger children (1--5 years). In each study, a double-blind, randomised controlled, staggered, dose-escalation design was used to evaluate 10 microg RTS,S dose (10 microg RTS,S in 0.1mL AS02A), 25 microg dose (25 microg RTS,S in 0.25mL AS02A) and finally a 50 microg dose (50 microg RTS,S in 0.5mL AS02A) of the RTS,S/AS02A candidate malaria vaccine administered according to a 0-, 1- and 3-month vaccination schedule. Safety and reactogenicity were evaluated before moving to a higher dose level. The RTS,S/AS02A vaccine was safe at all dose levels, in both age groups. No serious adverse events related to vaccination were reported. The frequency of local Grade 3 symptoms was low but tended to increase with increasing dose level. Grade 3 general adverse events in the RTS,S/AS02A groups were infrequent and of short duration. The majority of local and general Grade 3 symptoms resolved or decreased in intensity within 48h. The pattern and intensity of reactogenicity seen in these studies are similar to those of previous studies with RTS,S/AS02A. All doses were highly immunogenic for anti-CSP and anti-HBsAg antibodies. The pooled anti-CSP antibody data from the two studies showed that the 25 microg dose and 50 microg dose anti-CSP antibody response were similar at both dose levels. However, the immunogenicity of the 10 microg dose anti-CSP response was significantly lower than that of either the 50 microg or 25 microg dose. The 25 microg dose was selected for future studies of RTS,S/AS02A in paediatric populations.     

Targeting and vaccine durability are key for population-level impact and cost-effectiveness of a pox-protein HIV vaccine regimen in South Africa

Background

RV144 is to date the only HIV vaccine trial to demonstrate efficacy, albeit rapidly waning over time. The HVTN 702 trial is currently evaluating in South Africa a similar vaccine formulation to that of RV144 for subtype C HIV with additional boosters (pox-protein regimen). Using a detailed stochastic individual-based network model of disease transmission calibrated to the HIV epidemic, we investigate population-level impact and maximum cost of an HIV vaccine to remain cost-effective.