A Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody for Hospitalized Patients with Covid-19.

BACKGROUND: LY-CoV555, a neutralizing monoclonal antibody, has been associated with a decrease in viral load and the frequency of hospitalizations or emergency department visits among outpatients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19). Data are needed on the effect of this antibody in patients who are hospitalized with Covid-19. METHODS: In this platform trial of therapeutic agents, we randomly assigned hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure in a 1:1 ratio to receive either LY-CoV555 or matching placebo. In addition, all the patients received high-quality supportive care as background therapy, including the antiviral drug remdesivir and, when indicated, supplemental oxygen and glucocorticoids. LY-CoV555 (at a dose of 7000 mg) or placebo was administered as a single intravenous infusion over a 1-hour period. The primary outcome was a sustained recovery during a 90-day period, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. An interim futility assessment was performed on the basis of a seven-category ordinal scale for pulmonary function on day 5. RESULTS: On October 26, 2020, the data and safety monitoring board recommended stopping enrollment for futility after 314 patients (163 in the LY-CoV555 group and 151 in the placebo group) had undergone randomization and infusion. The median interval since the onset of symptoms was 7 days (interquartile range, 5 to 9). At day 5, a total of 81 patients (50%) in the LY-CoV555 group and 81 (54%) in the placebo group were in one of the two most favorable categories of the pulmonary outcome. Across the seven categories, the odds ratio of being in a more favorable category in the LY-CoV555 group than in the placebo group was 0.85 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.56 to 1.29; P = 0.45). The percentage of patients with the primary safety outcome (a composite of death, serious adverse events, or clinical grade 3 or 4 adverse events through day 5) was similar in the LY-CoV555 group and the placebo group (19% and 14%, respectively; odds ratio, 1.56; 95% CI, 0.78 to 3.10; P = 0.20). The rate ratio for a sustained recovery was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.47). CONCLUSIONS: Monoclonal antibody LY-CoV555, when coadministered with remdesivir, did not demonstrate efficacy among hospitalized patients who had Covid-19 without end-organ failure. (Funded by Operation Warp Speed and others; TICO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04501978.).

Evaluating Primary Endpoints for COVID-19 Therapeutic Trials to Assess Recovery.

Rationale: Uncertainty regarding the natural history of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) led to difficulty in efficacy endpoint selection for therapeutic trials. Capturing outcomes that occur after hospital discharge may improve assessment of clinical recovery among hospitalized patients with COVID-19. Objectives: Evaluate 90-day clinical course of patients hospitalized with COVID-19, comparing three distinct definitions of recovery. Methods: We used pooled data from three clinical trials of neutralizing monoclonal antibodies to compare: 1) the hospital discharge approach; 2) the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients with COVID-19) trials sustained recovery approach; and 3) a comprehensive approach. At the time of enrollment, all patients were hospitalized in a non-ICU setting without organ failure or major extrapulmonary manifestations of COVID-19. We defined discordance as a difference between time to recovery. Measurements and Main Results: Discordance between the hospital discharge and comprehensive approaches occurred in 170 (20%) of 850 enrolled participants, including 126 hospital readmissions and 24 deaths after initial hospital discharge. Discordant participants were older (median age, 68 vs. 59 years; P < 0.001) and more had a comorbidity (84% vs. 70%; P < 0.001). Of 170 discordant participants, 106 (62%) had postdischarge events captured by the TICO approach. Conclusions: Among patients hospitalized with COVID-19, 20% had clinically significant postdischarge events within 90 days after randomization in patients who would be considered "recovered" using the hospital discharge approach. Using the TICO approach balances length of follow-up with practical limitations. However, clinical trials of COVID-19 therapeutics should use follow-up times up to 90 days to assess clinical recovery more accurately.

Responses to a Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody for Hospitalized Patients With COVID-19 According to Baseline Antibody and Antigen Levels : A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial, bamlanivimab, a SARS-CoV-2-neutralizing monoclonal antibody, given in combination with remdesivir, did not improve outcomes among hospitalized patients with COVID-19 based on an early futility assessment. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the a priori hypothesis that bamlanivimab has greater benefit in patients without detectable levels of endogenous neutralizing antibody (nAb) at study entry than in those with antibodies, especially if viral levels are high. DESIGN: Randomized, placebo-controlled trial. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04501978). SETTING: Multicenter trial. PATIENTS: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 without end-organ failure. INTERVENTION: Bamlanivimab (7000 mg) or placebo. MEASUREMENTS: Antibody, antigen, and viral RNA levels were centrally measured on stored specimens collected at baseline. Patients were followed for 90 days for sustained recovery (defined as discharge to home and remaining home for 14 consecutive days) and a composite safety outcome (death, serious adverse events, organ failure, or serious infections). RESULTS: Among 314 participants (163 receiving bamlanivimab and 151 placebo), the median time to sustained recovery was 19 days and did not differ between the bamlanivimab and placebo groups (subhazard ratio [sHR], 0.99 [95% CI, 0.79 to 1.22]; sHR > 1 favors bamlanivimab). At entry, 50% evidenced production of anti-spike nAbs; 50% had SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid plasma antigen levels of at least 1000 ng/L. Among those without and with nAbs at study entry, the sHRs were 1.24 (CI, 0.90 to 1.70) and 0.74 (CI, 0.54 to 1.00), respectively (nominal P for interaction = 0.018). The sHR (bamlanivimab vs. placebo) was also more than 1 for those with plasma antigen or nasal viral RNA levels above median level at entry and was greatest for those without antibodies and with elevated levels of antigen (sHR, 1.48 [CI, 0.99 to 2.23]) or viral RNA (sHR, 1.89 [CI, 1.23 to 2.91]). Hazard ratios for the composite safety outcome (<1 favors bamlanivimab) also differed by serostatus at entry: 0.67 (CI, 0.37 to 1.20) for those without and 1.79 (CI, 0.92 to 3.48) for those with nAbs. LIMITATION: Subgroup analysis of a trial prematurely stopped because of futility; small sample size; multiple subgroups analyzed. CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety of bamlanivimab may differ depending on whether an endogenous nAb response has been mounted. The limited sample size of the study does not allow firm conclusions based on these findings, and further independent trials are required that assess other types of passive immune therapies in the same patient setting. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

The Association of Baseline Plasma SARS-CoV-2 Nucleocapsid Antigen Level and Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized With COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: Levels of plasma SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid (N) antigen may be an important biomarker in patients with COVID-19 and enhance our understanding of the pathogenesis of COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether levels of plasma antigen can predict short-term clinical outcomes and identify clinical and viral factors associated with plasma antigen levels in hospitalized patients with SARS-CoV-2. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study of baseline plasma antigen level from 2540 participants enrolled in the TICO (Therapeutics for Inpatients With COVID-19) platform trial from August 2020 to November 2021, with additional data on day 5 outcome and time to discharge. SETTING: 114 centers in 10 countries. PARTICIPANTS: Adults hospitalized for acute SARS-CoV-2 infection with 12 days or less of symptoms. MEASUREMENTS: Baseline plasma viral N antigen level was measured at a central laboratory. Delta variant status was determined from baseline nasal swabs using reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction. Associations between baseline patient characteristics and viral factors and baseline plasma antigen levels were assessed using both unadjusted and multivariable modeling. Association between elevated baseline antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater and outcomes, including worsening of ordinal pulmonary scale at day 5 and time to hospital discharge, were evaluated using logistic regression and Fine-Gray regression models, respectively. RESULTS: Plasma antigen was below the level of quantification in 5% of participants at enrollment, and 1000 ng/L or greater in 57%. Baseline pulmonary severity of illness was strongly associated with plasma antigen level, with mean plasma antigen level 3.10-fold higher among those requiring noninvasive ventilation or high-flow nasal cannula compared with room air (95% CI, 2.22 to 4.34). Plasma antigen level was higher in those who lacked antispike antibodies (6.42 fold; CI, 5.37 to 7.66) and in those with the Delta variant (1.73 fold; CI, 1.41 to 2.13). Additional factors associated with higher baseline antigen level included male sex, shorter time since hospital admission, decreased days of remdesivir, and renal impairment. In contrast, race, ethnicity, body mass index, and immunocompromising conditions were not associated with plasma antigen levels. Plasma antigen level of 1000 ng/L or greater was associated with a markedly higher odds of worsened pulmonary status at day 5 (odds ratio, 5.06 [CI, 3.41 to 7.50]) and longer time to hospital discharge (median, 7 vs. 4 days; subhazard ratio, 0.51 [CI, 0.45 to 0.57]), with subhazard ratios similar across all levels of baseline pulmonary severity. LIMITATIONS: Plasma samples were drawn at enrollment, not hospital presentation. No point-of-care test to measure plasma antigen is currently available. CONCLUSION: Elevated plasma antigen is highly associated with both severity of pulmonary illness and clinically important patient outcomes. Multiple clinical and viral factors are associated with plasma antigen level at presentation. These data support a potential role of ongoing viral replication in the pathogenesis of SARS-CoV-2 in hospitalized patients. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: U.S. government Operation Warp Speed and National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.

A Longitudinal Study of Ebola Sequelae in Liberia.

BACKGROUND: Multiple health problems have been reported in survivors of Ebola virus disease (EVD). Attribution of these problems to the disease without a control group for analysis is difficult. METHODS: We enrolled a cohort of EVD survivors and their close contacts and prospectively collected data on symptoms, physical examination findings, and laboratory results. A subset of participants underwent ophthalmologic examinations. Persistence of Ebola virus (EBOV) RNA in semen samples from survivors was determined. RESULTS: A total of 966 EBOV antibody-positive survivors and 2350 antibody-negative close contacts (controls) were enrolled, and 90% of these participants were followed for 12 months. At enrollment (median time to baseline visit, 358 days after symptom onset), six symptoms were reported significantly more often among survivors than among controls: urinary frequency (14.7% vs. 3.4%), headache (47.6% vs. 35.6%), fatigue (18.4% vs. 6.3%), muscle pain (23.1% vs. 10.1%), memory loss (29.2% vs. 4.8%), and joint pain (47.5% vs. 17.5%). On examination, more survivors than controls had abnormal abdominal, chest, neurologic, and musculoskeletal findings and uveitis. Other than uveitis (prevalence at enrollment, 26.4% vs. 12.1%; at year 1, 33.3% vs. 15.4%), the prevalence of these conditions declined during follow-up in both groups. The incidence of most symptoms, neurologic findings, and uveitis was greater among survivors than among controls. EBOV RNA was detected in semen samples from 30% of the survivors tested, with a maximum time from illness to detection of 40 months. CONCLUSIONS: A relatively high burden of symptoms was seen in all participants, but certain symptoms and examination findings were more common among survivors. With the exception of uveitis, these conditions declined in prevalence during follow-up in both groups. Viral RNA in semen persisted for a maximum of 40 months. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the National Eye Institute; PREVAIL III ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02431923.).

Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV): Designing Master Protocols for Evaluation of Candidate COVID-19 Therapeutics.

Working in an unprecedented time frame, the Accelerating COVID-19 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) public-private partnership developed and launched 9 master protocols between 14 April 2020 and 31 May 2021 to allow for the coordinated and efficient evaluation of multiple investigational therapeutic agents for COVID-19. The ACTIV master protocols were designed with a portfolio approach to serve the following patient populations with COVID-19: mild to moderately ill outpatients, moderately ill inpatients, and critically ill inpatients. To facilitate the execution of these studies and minimize start-up time, ACTIV selected several existing networks to launch the master protocols. The master protocols were also designed to test several agent classes prioritized by ACTIV that covered the spectrum of the disease pathophysiology. Each protocol, either adaptive or pragmatic, was designed to efficiently select those treatments that provide benefit to patients while rapidly eliminating those that were either ineffective or unsafe. The ACTIV Therapeutics-Clinical Working Group members describe the process by which these master protocols were designed, developed, and launched. Lessons learned that may be useful in meeting the challenges of a future pandemic are also described.

PREVAIL IV: A Randomized, Double-Blind, 2-Phase, Phase 2 Trial of Remdesivir vs Placebo for Reduction of Ebola Virus RNA in the Semen of Male Survivors.

BACKGROUND: Ebola virus RNA persists in the semen of male Ebola survivors for months to years after the acute infection, and male-to-female sexual transmission of the virus is well documented. We investigated whether remdesivir can safely reduce persistence of seminal Ebola virus RNA. METHODS: We recruited men with persistent seminal Ebola RNA in Liberia and Guinea. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous remdesivir (GS-5734; Gilead Sciences) or matching placebo administered once daily by intravenous infusion over 1 hour on 5 consecutive days. Stratification was by country and number of positive (1 or 2) preenrollment semen tests. We evaluated the difference in mean assay negativity rate (ANR), that is, the proportion of negative tests for each participant in each group in the treatment (days 1-28) and follow-up (months 2-6) phases on an intention-to-treat basis. RESULTS: We enrolled 38 men from July 2016 through June 2018. The mean treatment phase ANRs were 85% (standard deviation [SD] = 24%) and 76% (SD = 30%) in the remdesivir and placebo arms, respectively (P = .270). The mean follow-up phase ANRs were 96% (SD = 10%) and 81% (SD = 29%) in the remdesivir and placebo arms, respectively (P = .041). The 5-day remdesivir regimen was well tolerated with no safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS: In this small trial, remdesivir 100 mg/day for 5 days safely reduced the presence of Ebola virus RNA in the semen of Ebola survivors 2 to 6 months after administration. A larger follow-up study is necessary to confirm results. Clinical Trials Registration . NCT02818582.

Accelerating Coronavirus Disease 2019 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines-Selecting Compounds for Clinical Evaluation in Coronavirus Disease 2019 Clinical Trials.

Given the urgent need for coronavirus disease 2019 therapeutics, early in the pandemic the Accelerating Coronavirus Disease 2019 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines (ACTIV) public-private partnership rapidly designed a unique therapeutic agent intake and assessment process for candidate treatments of coronavirus disease 2019. These treatments included antivirals, immune modulators, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 neutralizing antibodies, and organ-supportive treatments at both the preclinical and clinical stages of development. The ACTIV Therapeutics-Clinical Working Group Agent Prioritization subgroup established a uniform data collection process required to perform an assessment of any agent type using review criteria that were identified and differentially weighted for each agent class. The ACTIV Therapeutics-Clinical Working Group evaluated over 750 therapeutic agents with potential application for coronavirus disease 2019 and prioritized promising candidates for testing within the master protocols conducted by ACTIV. In addition, promising agents among preclinical candidates were selected by ACTIV to be matched with laboratories that could assist in executing rigorous preclinical studies. Between April 14, 2020, and May 31, 2021, the Agent Prioritization subgroup advanced 20 agents into the Accelerating Coronavirus Disease 2019 Therapeutic Interventions and Vaccines master protocols and matched 25 agents with laboratories to assist with preclinical testing.

Characterization of an Asymptomatic Cohort of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Infected Individuals Outside of Wuhan, China.

PURPOSE: We aimed to further clarify the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of asymptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infections. METHODS: We identified close contacts of confirmed coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases in northeast Chongqing, China, who were confirmed by real-time reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction-positive (RT-PCR+). We stratified this cohort by normal vs abnormal findings on chest computed tomography (CT) and compared the strata regarding comorbidities, demographics, laboratory findings, viral transmission and other factors. RESULTS: Between January 2020 and March 2020, we identified and hospitalized 279 RT-PCR+ contacts of COVID-19 patients. 63 (23%) remained asymptomatic until discharge; 29 had abnormal and 34 had normal chest CT findings. The mean cohort age was 39.3 years, and 87.3% had no comorbidities. Mean time to diagnosis after close contact with a COVID-19 index patient was 16.0 days, and it was 13.4 days and 18.7 days for those with abnormal and normal CT findings, respectively (P < .05). Nine patients (14.3%) transmitted the virus to others; 4 and 5 were in the abnormal and normal CT strata, respectively. The median length of time for nucleic acid to turn negative was 13 days compared with 10.4 days in those with normal chest CT scans (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: A portion of asymptomatic individuals were capable of transmitting the virus to others. Given the frequency and potential infectiousness of asymptomatic infections, testing of traced contacts is essential. Studies of the impact of treatment of asymptomatic RT-PCR+ individuals on disease progression and transmission should be undertaken.

PREVAIL I Cluster Vaccination Study With rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP as Part of a Public Health Response in Liberia.

OBJECTIVE: In November 2015, a 15-year-old boy received a diagnosis of Ebola virus disease (EVD) at the John F. Kennedy Medical Center in Monrovia, Liberia. Two additional family members received a diagnosis of EVD. The protocol for a phase 2 placebo-controlled trial of 2 Ebola vaccines was amended and approved; in 4 days, a single-arm cluster vaccination trial using the Merck rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP vaccine was initiated. Here, we evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of the vaccine and discuss challenges for its implementation in a small Ebola outbreak. METHOD: We conducted a ring vaccination study among contacts and contacts of close contacts of EVD cases a in Monrovia. Participants were evaluated 1 and 6 months after vaccination. RESULTS: Among 650 close contacts and contacts of close contacts of EVD cases, 210 (32%) consented and were vaccinated with rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP. Of those vaccinated, 189 (90%) attended the month 1 follow-up visit; 166 (79%) attended the month 6 visit. No serious adverse events were reported. Among 88 participants without an elevated antibody level at baseline, 77.3% (95% confidence interval, 68.5-86.1) had an antibody response at 1 month. CONCLUSIONS: The Merck rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP vaccine appeared to be safe and immunogenic among the vaccinated individuals. However, fewer than one third of eligible individuals consented to vaccination. These data may help guide implementation decisions for of cluster vaccination programs in an Ebola cluster outbreak response situation.

Accelerating Vaccine Development During the 2013-2016 West African Ebola Virus Disease Outbreak.

The Ebola virus disease outbreak that began in Western Africa in December 2013 was unprecedented in both scope and spread, and the global response was slower and less coherent than was optimal given the scale and pace of the epidemic. Past experience with limited localized outbreaks, lack of licensed medical countermeasures, reluctance by first responders to direct scarce resources to clinical research, community resistance to outside interventions, and lack of local infrastructure were among the factors delaying clinical research during the outbreak. Despite these hurdles, the global health community succeeded in accelerating Ebola virus vaccine development, in a 5-month interval initiating phase I trials in humans in September 2014 and initiating phase II/III trails in February 2015. Each of the three Ebola virus disease-affected countries, Sierra Leone, Guinea, and Liberia, conducted a phase II/III Ebola virus vaccine trial. Only one of these trials evaluating recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus expressing Ebola virus glycoprotein demonstrated vaccine efficacy using an innovative mobile ring vaccination trial design based on a ring vaccination strategy responsible for eradicating smallpox that reached areas of new outbreaks. Thoughtful and intensive community engagement in each country enabled the critical community partnership and acceptance of the phase II/III in each country. Due to the delayed clinical trial initiation, relative to the epidemiologic peak of the outbreak in the three countries, vaccine interventions may or may not have played a major role in bringing the epidemic under control. Having demonstrated that clinical trials can be performed during a large outbreak, the global research community can now build on the experience to implement trials more rapidly and efficiently in future outbreaks. Incorporating clinical research needs into planning for future health emergencies and understanding what kind of trial designs is needed for reliable results in an epidemic of limited duration should improve global response to future infectious disease outbreaks.

Use of Existing Diagnostic Reverse-Transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction Assays for Detection of Ebola Virus RNA in Semen.

Sexual transmission of Ebola virus in Liberia has now been documented and associated with new clusters in regions previously declared Ebola free. Assays that have Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) and are routinely used to detect Ebola virus RNA in whole blood and plasma specimens at the Liberian Institute for Biomedical Research were tested for their suitability in detecting the presence of Ebola virus RNA in semen. Qiagen AVL extraction protocols, as well as the Ebola Zaire Target 1 and major groove binder quantitative reverse-transcription polymerase chain reaction assays, were demonstrably suitable for this purpose and should facilitate epidemiologic investigations, including those involving long-term survivors of Ebola.

Understanding the role of mHealth and other media interventions for behavior change to enhance child survival and development in low- and middle-income countries: an evidence review.

Given the high morbidity and mortality among children in low- and middle-income countries as a result of preventable causes, the U.S. government and the United Nations Children's Fund convened an Evidence Summit on Enhancing Child Survival and Development in Lower- and Middle-Income Countries by Achieving Population-Level Behavior Change on June 3-4, 2013, in Washington, D.C. This article summarizes evidence for technological advances associated with population-level behavior changes necessary to advance child survival and healthy development in children under 5 years of age in low- and middle-income countries. After a rigorous evidence selection process, the authors assessed science, technology, and innovation papers that used mHealth, social/transmedia, multiplatform media, health literacy, and devices for behavior changes supporting child survival and development. Because of an insufficient number of studies on health literacy and devices that supported causal attribution of interventions to outcomes, the review focused on mHealth, social/transmedia, and multiplatform media. Overall, this review found that some mHealth interventions have sufficient evidence to make topic-specific recommendations for broader implementation, scaling, and next research steps (e.g., adherence to HIV/AIDS antiretroviral therapy, uptake and demand of maternal health service, and compliance with malaria treatment guidelines). While some media evidence demonstrates effectiveness in changing cognitive abilities, knowledge, and attitudes, evidence is minimal on behavioral endpoints linked to child survival. Population level behavior change is necessary to end preventable child deaths. Donors and low- and middle-income countries are encouraged to implement recommendations for informing practice, policy, and research decisions to fully maximize the impact potential of mHealth and multimedia for child survival and development.

Investigating financial incentives for maternal health: an introduction.

Projection of current trends in maternal and neonatal mortality reduction shows that many countries will fall short of the UN Millennium Development Goal 4 and 5. Underutilization of maternal health services contributes to this poor progress toward reducing maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality. Moreover, the quality of services continues to lag in many countries, with a negative effect on the health of women and their babies, including deterring women from seeking care. To enhance the use and provision of quality maternal care, countries and donors are increasingly using financial incentives. This paper introduces the JHPN Supplement, in which each paper reviews the evidence of the effectiveness of a specific financial incentive instrument with the aim of improving the use and quality of maternal healthcare and impact. The US Agency for International Development and the US National Institutes of Health convened a US Government Evidence Summit on Enhancing Provision and Use of Maternal Health Services through Financial Incentives on 24-25 April 2012 in Washington, DC. The Summit brought together leading global experts in finance, maternal health, and health systems from governments, academia, development organizations, and foundations to assess the evidence on whether financial incentives significantly and substantially increase provision, use and quality of maternal health services, and the contextual factors that impact the effectiveness of these incentives. Evidence review teams evaluated the multidisciplinary evidence of various financial mechanisms, including supply-side incentives (e.g. performance-based financing, user fees, and various insurance mechanisms) and demand-side incentives (e.g. conditional cash transfers, vouchers, user fee exemptions, and subsidies for care-seeking). At the Summit, the teams presented a synthesis of evidence and initial recommendations on practice, policy, and research for discussion. The Summit enabled structured feedback on recommendations which the teams included in their final papers appearing in this Supplement. Papers in this Supplement review the evidence for a specific financial incentive mechanism (e.g. pay for performance, conditional cash transfer) to improve the use and quality of maternal healthcare and makes recommendations for programmes and future research. While data on programmes using financial incentives for improved use and indications of the quality of maternal health services support specific conclusions and recommendations, including those for future research, data linking the use of financial incentives with improved health outcomes are minimal.

Evidence acquisition and evaluation for evidence summit on enhancing provision and use of maternal health services through financial incentives.

Recognizing the need for evidence to inform US Government and governments of the low- and middle-income countries on efficient, effective maternal health policies, strategies, and programmes, the US Government convened the Evidence Summit on Enhancing Provision and Use of Maternal Health Services through Financial Incentives in April 2012 in Washington, DC, USA. This paper summarizes the background and methods for the acquisition and evaluation of the evidence used for achieving the goals of the Summit. The goal of the Summit was to obtain multidisciplinary expert review of literature to inform both US Government and governments of the low- and middle-income countries on evidence-informed practice, policies, and strategies for financial incentives. Several steps were undertaken to define the tasks for the Summit and identify the appropriate evidence for review. The process began by identifying focal questions intended to inform governments of the low-and middle-income countries and the US Government about the efficacy of supply- and demand-side financial incentives for enhanced provision and use of quality maternal health services. Experts were selected representing the research and programme communities, academia, relevant non-governmental organizations, and government agencies and were assembled into Evidence Review Teams. This was followed by a systematic process to gather relevant peer-reviewed literature that would inform the focal questions. Members of the Evidence Review Teams were invited to add relevant papers not identified in the initial literature review to complete the bibliography. The Evidence Review Teams were asked to comply with a specific evaluation framework for recommendations on practice and policy based on both expert opinion and the quality of the data. Details of the search processes and methods used for screening and quality reviews are described.

Financial incentives and maternal health: where do we go from here?

Health financing strategies that incorporate financial incentives are being applied in many low- and middle-income countries, and improving maternal and neonatal health is often a central goal. As yet, there have been few reviews of such programmes and their impact on maternal health. The US Government Evidence Summit on Enhancing Provision and use of Maternal Health Services through Financial Incentives was convened on 24-25 April 2012 to address this gap. This article, the final in a series assessing the effects of financial incentives--performance-based incentives (PBIs), insurance, user fee exemption programmes, conditional cash transfers, and vouchers--summarizes the evidence and discusses issues of context, programme design and implementation, cost-effectiveness, and sustainability. We suggest key areas to consider when designing and implementing financial incentive programmes for enhancing maternal health and highlight gaps in evidence that could benefit from additional research. Although the methodological rigor of studies varies, the evidence, overall, suggests that financial incentives can enhance demand for and improve the supply of maternal health services. Definitive evidence demonstrating a link between incentives and improved health outcomes is lacking; however, the evidence suggests that financial incentives can increase the quantity and quality of maternal health services and address health systems and financial barriers that prevent women from accessing and providers from delivering quality, lifesaving maternal healthcare.

A taxonomy and results from a comprehensive review of 28 maternal health voucher programmes.

It is increasingly clear that Millennium Development Goal 4 and 5 will not be achieved in many low- and middle-income countries with the weakest gains among the poor. Recognizing that there are large inequalities in reproductive health outcomes, the post-2015 agenda on universal health coverage will likely generate strategies that target resources where maternal and newborn deaths are the highest. In 2012, the United States Agency for International Development convened an Evidence Summit to review the knowledge and gaps on the utilization of financial incentives to enhance the quality and uptake of maternal healthcare. The goal was to provide donors and governments of the low- and middle-income countries with evidence-informed recommendations on practice, policy, and strategies regarding the use of financial incentives, including vouchers, to enhance the demand and supply of maternal health services. The findings in this paper are intended to guide governments interested in maternal health voucher programmes with recommendations for sustainable implementation and impact. The Evidence Summit undertook a systematic review of five financing strategies. This paper presents the methods and findings for vouchers, building on a taxonomy to catalogue knowledge about voucher programme design and functionality. More than 120 characteristics under five major categories were identified: programme principles (objectives and financing); governance and management; benefits package and beneficiary targeting; providers (contracting and service pricing); and implementation arrangements (marketing, claims processing, and monitoring and evaluation). Among the 28 identified maternal health voucher programmes, common characteristics included: a stated objective to increase the use of services among the means-tested poor; contracted-out programme management; contracting either exclusively private facilities or a mix of public and private providers; prioritizing community-based distribution of vouchers; and tracking individual claims for performance purposes. Maternal voucher programmes differed on whether contracted providers were given training on clinical or administrative issues; whether some form of service verification was undertaken at facility or community-level; and the relative size of programme management costs in the overall programme budget. Evidence suggests voucher programmes can serve populations with national-level impact. Reaching scale depends on whether the voucher programme can: (i) keep management costs low, (ii) induce a large demand-side response among the bottom two quintiles, and (iii) achieve a quality of care that translates a greater number of facility-based deliveries into a reduction in maternal morbidity and mortality.

Pregnancy, pregnancy outcomes, and infant growth and development after recovery from Ebola virus disease in Liberia: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Minimal data exist on pregnancy following recovery from Ebola in people of child-bearing potential (females aged roughly 18-45 years). The aim of this study was to assess viral persistence or reactivation in pregnancy, the frequency of placental transfer of anti-Ebola IgG antibodies, and pregnancy outcomes in this population. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we studied self-reported pregnancies in two groups: seropositive people who had recovered from Ebola virus disease (seropositive group) and seronegative people who had close contact with people with Ebola (seronegative group). Participants had enrolled in the PREVAIL III longitudinal study and were exposed during the 2014-2016 Liberian Ebola outbreak. The primary outcome was pregnancy result. We assessed rates of livebirths and other pregnancy results in both study groups, and presence of Ebola RNA by PCR in samples of placenta, maternal and cord blood, breastmilk, and vaginal secretions from people who had recovered from Ebola who conceived a median of 14 months after acute Ebola virus disease. Mixed-model logistic regression evaluated associations between first-reported pregnancy outcome, age, and study group. Growth and neurodevelopment in the infants born to people in the seropositive group were assessed at 6-month intervals for 2 years. Data were accrued by PREVAIL III study staff. FINDINGS: 1566 participants were enrolled between June 17, 2015, and Dec 14, 2017, of whom 639 became pregnant (215 seropositive, 424 seronegative) and 589 reported pregnancy outcomes (206 seropositive, 383 seronegative). 105 infants born to 98 mothers in the seropositive group were enrolled in the birth cohort. Ebola RNA was not detected in 205 samples of placenta, cord blood, or maternal blood taken at birth from 54 mothers in the seropositive group, nor in 367 vaginal swabs. Viral RNA was found in two of 354 longitudinal breastmilk samples. All but one of 57 infants born during these 54 births were seropositive for anti-Ebola antibodies. Neonates showed high concentrations of anti-Ebola IgG, which declined after 6 months. Odds of adverse pregnancy outcome among the two groups were indistinguishable (OR 1·13, 95% CI 0·71-1·79). Compared with WHO standards, infants born to those in the seropositive group had lower median weight and length, and larger median head circumference over 2 years. Compared with a cohort from the USA accrual of gross motor developmental milestones was similar, whereas attainment of pincer grasp and early vocalisation were mildly delayed. INTERPRETATION: The risks of Ebola virus reactivation in the peripartum and postpartum period and of adverse birth outcomes are low in those who have recovered from Ebola virus disease and become pregnant approximately 1 year after acute Ebola virus disease. The implication for clinical practice is that care of people who are pregnant and who have recovered from Ebola can be offered without risks to health-care providers or stigmatisation of the mothers and their offspring. The implication for prospective mothers is that safe pregnancies are entirely possible after recovery from Ebola. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and Liberia Ministry of Health.

The Evolution of Medical Countermeasures for Ebola Virus Disease: Lessons Learned and Next Steps.

The Ebola virus disease outbreak that occurred in Western Africa from 2013-2016, and subsequent smaller but increasingly frequent outbreaks of Ebola virus disease in recent years, spurred an unprecedented effort to develop and deploy effective vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics. This effort led to the U.S. regulatory approval of a diagnostic test, two vaccines, and two therapeutics for Ebola virus disease indications. Moreover, the establishment of fieldable diagnostic tests improved the speed with which patients can be diagnosed and public health resources mobilized. The United States government has played and continues to play a key role in funding and coordinating these medical countermeasure efforts. Here, we describe the coordinated U.S. government response to develop medical countermeasures for Ebola virus disease and we identify lessons learned that may improve future efforts to develop and deploy effective countermeasures against other filoviruses, such as Sudan virus and Marburg virus.