Developing a Rapid Response Single IRB Model for Conducting Research During a Public Health Emergency.

Research is foundational for evidence-based management of patients. Clinical research, however, takes time to plan, conduct, and disseminate-a luxury that is rarely available during a public health emergency. The University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC) developed a single institutional review board (IRB), with a vision to establish a rapid review resource for a network focused on clinical research of emerging pathogens in the United States. A core aspect of successful initiation of research during a pandemic or epidemic is the ability to operationalize an approach for rapid ethical review of human subject research and conduct those reviews at multiple sites-without losing any of the substantive aspects of ethics review. This process must be cultivated in anticipation of a public health emergency. US guidance for operationalizing IRB review for multisite research in a public health emergency is not well studied and processes are not well established. UNMC sought to address operational gaps and identify the unique procedural needs of rapid response single IRB (RR-sIRB) review of multisite research by conducting a series of preparedness exercises to develop and test the RR-sIRB model. For decades, emergency responder, healthcare, and public health organizations have conducted emergency preparedness exercises to test requirements for emergency response. In this article, we describe 2 types of simulation exercises conducted by UNMC: workshops and tabletops. This effort represents a unique use of emergency preparedness exercises to develop, refine, and test rapid review functions for an sIRB and to validate readiness of regulatory research processes. Such processes are crucial for conducting rapid, ethical, and sound clinical research in public health emergencies.

Prepared to Act: Lessons Learned by the Special Pathogens Research Network, Based on Collaborations with the NIAID-Led Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial.

The need for well-controlled clinical trials is fundamental to advancing medicine. Care should be taken to maintain high standards in trial design and conduct even during emergency medical events such as an infectious disease outbreak. In 2020, SARS-CoV-2 emerged and rapidly impacted populations around the globe. The need for effective therapeutics was immediately evident, prompting the National Institutes of Health to initiate the Adaptive COVID-19 Treatment Trial. The Special Pathogens Research Network, made up of 10 Regional Emerging Special Pathogens Treatment Centers, was approached to participate in this trial and readily joined the trial on short notice. By trial closure, the Special Pathogens Research Network sites, making up 19% of all study sites, enrolled 26% of the total participants. The initial resources available and experience in running clinical trials at each treatment center varied from minimal experience and few staff to extensive experience and a large staff. Based on experiences during the first phase of this trial, the Special Pathogens Research Network members provided feedback regarding operational lessons learned and recommendations for conducting future studies during a pandemic. Communication, collaboration, information technology, regulatory processes, and access to resources were identified as important topics to address. Key stakeholders including institutions, institutional review boards, and study personnel must maintain routine communication to efficiently and effectively activate when future research needs arise. Regular and standardized training for new personnel will aid in transitions and project continuity, especially in a rapidly evolving environment. Trainings should include local just-in-time training for new staff and sponsor-designed modules to refresh current staff knowledge. We offer recommendations that can be used by institutions and sponsors to determine goals and needs when preparing to set up this type of trial for critical, short-notice needs.

Safety and immunogenicity of an inactivated eastern equine encephalitis virus vaccine.

BACKGROUND: Eastern equine encephalitis virus (EEEV) is a mosquito borne alphavirus spread primarily in Atlantic and Gulf Coast regions of the United States. EEEV is the causative agent of a devastating meningoencephalitis syndrome, with approximately 30% mortality and significant morbidity. There is no licensed human vaccine against EEEV. An inactivated EEEV vaccine has been offered under investigational new drug (IND) protocols at the United States Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases (USAMRIID) since 1976. METHODS: Healthy at-risk laboratory personnel received inactivated PE-6 strain EEEV (TSI-GSD 104) vaccine under two separate IND protocols. Protocol FY 99-11 (2002-2008) had a primary series consisting of doses on day 0, 7, and 28. Protocol FY 06-31 (2008-2016) utilized a primary series with doses on day 0 and 28, and month 6. Participants with an inadequate immune response, plaque reduction neutralization test with 80% cut-off (PRNT80) titer < 40, received booster vaccination. Volunteers with prior EEEV vaccination were eligible to enroll for booster doses based on annual titer evaluation. RESULTS: The FY06-31 dosing schema resulted in significantly greater post-primary series immune response (PRNT80 ≥ 40) rates (84% vs 54%) and geometric mean titers (184.1 vs 39.4). The FY 06-31 dosing schema also resulted in significantly greater cumulative annual immune response rates from 1 to up to 7 years post vaccination (75% vs 59%) and geometric mean of titers (60.1 vs 43.0). The majority of probably or definitely related adverse events were mild and local; there were no probably or definitely related serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Inactivated PE-6 EEEV vaccine is safe and immunogenic in at-risk laboratory personnel. A prolonged primary series, with month 6 dose, significantly improved vaccine immunogenicity both post-primary series and longitudinally on annual titers. Despite decades of safe use under IND, full licensure is not planned due to manufacturing constraints, and ongoing development of alternatives.

Intensive Care Unit-Like Care of Nonhuman Primates with Ebola Virus Disease.

BACKGROUND: Ebola virus disease (EVD) supportive care strategies are largely guided by retrospective observational research. This study investigated the effect of EVD supportive care algorithms on duration of survival in a controlled nonhuman primate (NHP) model. METHODS: Fourteen rhesus macaques were challenged intramuscularly with a target dose of Ebola virus (1000 plaque-forming units; Kikwit). NHPs were allocated to intensive care unit (ICU)-like algorithms (n = 7), intravenous fluids plus levofloxacin (n = 2), or a control group (n = 5). The primary outcome measure was duration of survival, and secondary outcomes included changes in clinical laboratory values. RESULTS: Duration of survival was not significantly different between the pooled ICU-like algorithm and control groups (8.2 vs 6.9 days of survival; hazard ratio; 0.50; P = .25). Norepinephrine was effective in transiently maintaining baseline blood pressure. NHPs treated with ICU-like algorithms had delayed onset of liver and kidney injury. CONCLUSIONS: While an obvious survival difference was not observed with ICU-like care, clinical observations from this model may aid in EVD supportive care NHP model refinement.

Marburg virus disease: A summary for clinicians.

OBJECTIVES: This article summarizes the countermeasures for Marburg virus disease, focusing on pathogenesis, clinical features and diagnostics. There is an emphasis on therapies and vaccines that have demonstrated, through their evaluation in nonhuman primates (NHPs) and/or in humans, potential for use in an emergency situation. METHODS: A standardized literature review was conducted on vaccines and treatments for Marburg virus disease, with a focus on human and nonhuman primate data published in the last five years. More detail on the methods that were used is summarized in a companion methods paper. RESULTS: The study identified six treatments and four vaccine platforms that have demonstrated, through their efficacy in NHPs, potential benefit for treating or preventing infection in humans. CONCLUSION: Succinct summaries of Marburg countermeasures are provided to give the busy clinician a head start in reviewing the literature if faced with a patient with Marburg virus disease. Links to other authoritative sources of information are also provided.

Remdesivir for the Treatment of Covid-19 - Final Report.

BACKGROUND: Although several therapeutic agents have been evaluated for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19), no antiviral agents have yet been shown to be efficacious. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of intravenous remdesivir in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remdesivir (200 mg loading dose on day 1, followed by 100 mg daily for up to 9 additional days) or placebo for up to 10 days. The primary outcome was the time to recovery, defined by either discharge from the hospital or hospitalization for infection-control purposes only. RESULTS: A total of 1062 patients underwent randomization (with 541 assigned to remdesivir and 521 to placebo). Those who received remdesivir had a median recovery time of 10 days (95% confidence interval [CI], 9 to 11), as compared with 15 days (95% CI, 13 to 18) among those who received placebo (rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.49; P<0.001, by a log-rank test). In an analysis that used a proportional-odds model with an eight-category ordinal scale, the patients who received remdesivir were found to be more likely than those who received placebo to have clinical improvement at day 15 (odds ratio, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.9, after adjustment for actual disease severity). The Kaplan-Meier estimates of mortality were 6.7% with remdesivir and 11.9% with placebo by day 15 and 11.4% with remdesivir and 15.2% with placebo by day 29 (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.03). Serious adverse events were reported in 131 of the 532 patients who received remdesivir (24.6%) and in 163 of the 516 patients who received placebo (31.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that remdesivir was superior to placebo in shortening the time to recovery in adults who were hospitalized with Covid-19 and had evidence of lower respiratory tract infection. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; ACTT-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04280705.).

Advanced Preparation Makes Research in Emergencies and Isolation Care Possible: The Case of Novel Coronavirus Disease (COVID-19).

The optimal time to initiate research on emergencies is before they occur. However, timely initiation of high-quality research may launch during an emergency under the right conditions. These include an appropriate context, clarity in scientific aims, preexisting resources, strong operational and research structures that are facile, and good governance. Here, Nebraskan rapid research efforts early during the 2020 coronavirus disease pandemic, while participating in the first use of U.S. federal quarantine in 50 years, are described from these aspects, as the global experience with this severe emerging infection grew apace. The experience has lessons in purpose, structure, function, and performance of research in any emergency, when facing any threat.

A Methodology for Determining Which Diseases Warrant Care in a High-Level Containment Care Unit.

Although the concept of high-level containment care (HLCC or 'biocontainment'), dates back to 1969, the 2014-2016 outbreak of Ebola virus disease (EVD) brought with it a renewed emphasis on the use of specialized HLCC units in the care of patients with EVD. Employment of these units in the United States and Western Europe resulted in a significant decrease in mortality compared to traditional management in field settings. Moreover, this employment appeared to significantly lessen the risk of nosocomial transmission of disease; no secondary cases occurred among healthcare workers in these units. While many now accept the wisdom of utilizing HLCC units and principles in the management of EVD (and, presumably, of other transmissible and highly hazardous viral hemorrhagic fevers, such as those caused by Marburg and Lassa viruses), no consensus exists regarding additional diseases that might warrant HLCC. We propose here a construct designed to make such determinations for existing and newly discovered diseases. The construct examines infectivity (as measured by the infectious dose needed to infect 50% of a given population (ID50)), communicability (as measured by the reproductive number (R0)), and hazard (as measured by morbidity and mortality). Diseases fulfilling all three criteria (i.e., those that are highly infectious, communicable, and highly hazardous) are considered candidates for HLCC management if they also meet a fourth criterion, namely that they lack effective and available licensed countermeasures.

Evaluating Promising Investigational Medical Countermeasures: Recommendations in the Absence of Guidelines.

Emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases pose growing global public health threats. However, research on and development of medical countermeasures (MCMs) for such pathogens is limited by the sporadic and unpredictable nature of outbreaks, lack of financial incentive for pharmaceutical companies to develop interventions for many of the diseases, lack of clinical research capacity in areas where these diseases are endemic, and the ethical dilemmas related to conducting scientific research in humanitarian emergencies. Hence, clinicians providing care for patients with emerging diseases are often faced with making clinical decisions about the safety and effectiveness of experimental MCMs, based on limited or no human safety, preclinical, or even earlier product research or historical data, for compassionate use. Such decisions can have immense impact on current and subsequent patients, the public health response, and success of future clinical trials. We highlight these dilemmas and underscore the need to proactively set up procedures that allow early and ethical deployment of MCMs as part of clinical trials. When clinical trials remain difficult to deploy, we present several suggestions of how compassionate use of off-label and unlicensed MCMs can be made more informed and ethical. We highlight several collaborations seeking to address these gaps in data and procedures to inform future clinical and public health decision making.

Biocontainment Units: Moving to the Next Phase of Evolution.

The concept and belief in the idea of "biocontainment" has undergone significant evolution during the past 20 years. The authors believe that the time is right to move to the next phase of this evolution to reassess establishment of formal standards for what constitutes a biocontainment unit and what diseases might be considered for admission to a biocontainment unit.

The Special Pathogens Research Network: Enabling Research Readiness.

The 2013-2016 epidemic of Ebola virus disease (EVD) that originated in West Africa underscored many of the challenges to conducting clinical research during an ongoing infectious disease epidemic, both in the most affected countries of Guinea, Liberia, and Sierra Leone, as well as in the United States and Europe, where a total of 27 patients with EVD received care in biocontainment units. The Special Pathogens Research Network (SPRN) was established in the United States in November 2016 to provide an organizational structure to leverage the expertise of the 10 Regional Ebola and Other Special Pathogen Treatment Centers (RESPTCs); it was intended to develop and support infrastructure to improve readiness to conduct clinical research in the United States. The network enables the rapid activation and coordination of clinical research in the event of an epidemic and facilitates opportunities for multicenter research when the RESPTCs are actively caring for patients requiring a biocontainment unit. Here we provide an overview of opportunities identified in the clinical research infrastructure during the West Africa EVD epidemic and the SPRN activities to meet the ongoing challenges in the context of Ebola virus and other special pathogens.

Perspectives on the Management of Children in a Biocontainment Unit: Report of the NETEC Pediatric Workgroup.

During the outbreak of Ebola virus disease that struck West Africa during 2014-2016, a small handful of expatriate patients were evacuated to specialized high-level containment care units, or biocontainment units, in the United States and Western Europe. Given the lower mortality rate (18% versus 40% for those treated in Africa) among these patients, it is likely that high-level containment care will be used in the future with increasing frequency. It is also likely that children infected with Ebola and other highly hazardous communicable diseases will someday require such care. The National Ebola Training and Education Center convened a pediatric workgroup to consider the unique and problematic issues posed by these potential child patients. We report here the results of those discussions.

An Emerging Biothreat: Crimean-Congo Hemorrhagic Fever Virus in Southern and Western Asia.

Tick-borne Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever virus (CCHFV) is endemic in numerous countries, but the epidemiology and epizoology of Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF) remain to be defined for most regions of the world. Using a broad database search approach, we reviewed the literature on CCHF and CCHFV in Southern and Western Asia to better define the disease burden in these areas. We used a One Health approach, moving beyond a focus solely on human disease burden to more comprehensively define this burden by reviewing CCHF case reports, human and animal CCHFV seroprevalence studies, and human and animal CCHFV isolations. In addition, we used published literature to estimate the distribution of Hyalomma ticks and infection of these ticks by CCHFV. Using these data, we propose a new classification scheme for organizing the evaluated countries into five categories by level of evidence for CCHF endemicity. Twelve countries have reported CCHF cases, five from Southern Asia and seven from Western Asia. These were assigned to level 1 or 2. Eleven countries that have evidence of vector circulation but did not report confirmed CCHF cases were assigned to level 3 or 4. This classification scheme was developed to inform policy toward strengthening CCHF disease surveillance in the Southern and Western Asia regions. In particular, the goal of this review was to inform international organizations, local governments, and health-care professionals about current shortcomings in CCHFV surveillance in these two high-prevalence regions.

Ebola Virus Causes Intestinal Tract Architectural Disruption and Bacterial Invasion in Non-Human Primates.

In the 2014⁻2016 West Africa Ebola Virus (EBOV) outbreak, there was a significant concern raised about the potential for secondary bacterial infection originating from the gastrointestinal tract, which led to the empiric treatment of many patients with antibiotics. This retrospective pathology case series summarizes the gastrointestinal pathology observed in control animals in the rhesus EBOV-Kikwit intramuscular 1000 plaque forming unit infection model. All 31 Non-human primates (NHPs) exhibited lymphoid depletion of gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) but the severity and the specific location of the depletion varied. Mesenteric lymphoid depletion and necrosis were present in 87% (27/31) of NHPs. There was mucosal barrier disruption of the intestinal tract with mucosal necrosis and/or ulceration most notably in the duodenum (16%), cecum (16%), and colon (29%). In the intestinal tract, hemorrhage was noted most frequently in the duodenum (52%) and colon (45%). There were focal areas of bacterial submucosal invasion in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract in 9/31 (29%) of NHPs. Only 2/31 (6%) had evidence of pancreatic necrosis. One NHP (3%) experienced jejunal intussusception which may have been directly related to EBOV. Immunofluorescence assays demonstrated EBOV antigen in CD68+ macrophage/monocytes and endothelial cells in areas of GI vascular injury or necrosis.

Distinguishing Respiratory Features of Category A/B Potential Bioterrorism Agents from Community-Acquired Pneumonia.

Differentiating between illness caused by community-acquired respiratory pathogens versus infection by biothreat agents is a challenge. This review highlights respiratory and clinical features of category A and B potential biothreat agents that have respiratory features as their primary presenting signs and symptoms. Recent world events make such a reminder that the possibility of rare diseases and unlikely events can occur timely for clinicians, policymakers, and public health authorities. Despite some distinguishing features, nothing can replace good clinical acumen and a strong index of suspicion in the diagnosis of uncommon infectious diseases.

Beyond the Dirty Dozen: A Proposed Methodology for Assessing Future Bioweapon Threats.

Background: Defense policy planners and countermeasure developers are often faced with vexing problems involving the prioritization of resources and efforts. This is especially true in the area of Biodefense, where each new emerging infectious disease outbreak brings with it questions regarding the causative agent's potential for weaponization. Recent experience with West Nile Virus, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome, Monkeypox, and H1N1 Influenza highlights this problem. Appropriately, in each of these cases, the possibility of bioterrorism was raised, although each outbreak ultimately proved to have a natural origin. In fact, determining whether an outbreak has an unnatural origin can be quite difficult. Thus, the questions remain: could the causative agents of these and other emerging infectious disease outbreaks pose a future weaponization threat? And how great is that threat? Should precious resources be diverted from other defense efforts in order to prepare for possible hostile employment of novel diseases by belligerents? Answering such critical questions requires some form of systematic threat assessment. Methods: Through extensive collaborative work conducted within NATO's Biomedical Advisory Council, we developed a scoring matrix for evaluating the weaponization potential of the causative agents of such diseases and attempted to validate our matrix by examining the reproducibility of data using known threat agents. Our matrix included 12 attributes of a potential weapon and was provided, along with detailed scoring instructions, to 12 groups of biodefense experts in 6 NATO nations. Study participants were asked to score each of these 12 attributes on a scale of 0-3: Infectivity, Infection-to-Disease Ratio (Reliability), Predictability (& Incubation Period), Morbidity & Mortality (Virulence), Ease of Large-Scale Production & Storage, Aerosol Stability, Atmospheric Stability, Ease of Dispersal, Communicability, Prophylactic Countermeasure Availability, Therapeutic Countermeasure Availability, and Ease of Detection. Reproducibility of scoring data was assessed by examining the standard deviations (SD) of mean scores. Results: Our results were unexpected. Several familiar biothreat diseases such as anthrax and tularemia were judged, by our experts, to be less threatening than many others owing to a number of factors including ease of detection, lack of communicability, and the ready availability of countermeasures. Conversely, several toxins were judged by experts to have very high potential as threat agents owing, in part, to their reliability, virulence, and a lack of available countermeasures. Agreement among experts, as determined by lower SD about a mean score, was greater for more familiar threats. Discussion: Our study was designed to provide a concise and east-to-apply set of criteria that could be used by NATO nations to evaluate emerging infectious disease threats with respect to their weaponization potential. Our results were unexpected. We believe that a lack of appropriate weighting factors may explain these results and suggest that future studies weigh each of the 12 proposed criteria based on the intended use of the assessment data and other situational factors. We believe that the greatest value of our study lies in a codification of the attributes of a biological weapon.