ABSTRACT
First-generation anit-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines were highly successful. They rapidly met an unforeseen emergency need, saved millions of lives, and simultaneously eased the burden on healthcare systems worldwide. The first-generation vaccines, however, focused too narrowly on antibody-based immunity as the sole marker of vaccine trial success, resulting in large knowledge gaps about waning vaccine protection, lack of vaccine robustness to viral mutation, and lack of efficacy in immunocompromised populations. Detailed reviews of first-generation vaccines, including their mode of action and geographical distribution, have been published elsewhere. Second-generation clinical trials must address these gaps by evaluating a broader range of immune markers, including those representing cell-mediated immunity, to ensure the most protective and long-lasting vaccines are brought to market.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 Vaccines , Clinical Trials as Topic , HumansABSTRACT
Vaccine candidates for Shigella are approaching phase 3 clinical trials in the target population of young children living in low- and middle-income countries. Key study design decisions will need to be made to maximize the success of such trials and minimize the time to licensure and implementation. We convened an ad hoc working group to identify the key aspects of trial design that would meet the regulatory requirements to achieve the desired indication of prevention of moderate or severe shigellosis due to strains included in the vaccine. The proposed primary endpoint of pivotal Shigella vaccine trials is the efficacy of the vaccine against the first episode of acute moderate or severe diarrhea caused by the Shigella strains contained within the vaccine. Moderate or severe shigellosis could be defined by a modified Vesikari score with dysentery and molecular detection of vaccine-preventable Shigella strains. This report summarizes the rationale and current data behind these considerations, which will evolve as new data become available and after further review and consultation by global regulators and policymakers.
ABSTRACT
Randomized vaccine trials are used to assess vaccine efficacy (VE) and to characterize the durability of vaccine-induced protection. If efficacy is demonstrated, the treatment of placebo volunteers becomes an issue. For COVID-19 vaccine trials, there is broad consensus that placebo volunteers should be offered a vaccine once efficacy has been established. This will likely lead to most placebo volunteers crossing over to the vaccine arm, thus complicating the assessment of long term durability. We show how to analyze durability following placebo crossover and demonstrate that the VE profile that would be observed in a placebo controlled trial is recoverable in a trial with placebo crossover. This result holds no matter when the crossover occurs and with no assumptions about the form of the efficacy profile. We only require that the VE profile applies to the newly vaccinated irrespective of the timing of vaccination. We develop different methods to estimate efficacy within the context of a proportional hazards regression model and explore via simulation the implications of placebo crossover for estimation of VE under different efficacy dynamics and study designs. We apply our methods to simulated COVID-19 vaccine trials with durable and waning VE and a total follow-up of 2 years.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Vaccines , COVID-19 Vaccines , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Licensed vaccines are urgently needed for emerging infectious diseases, but the nature of these epidemics causes challenges for the design of phase III trials to evaluate vaccine efficacy. Designing and executing rigorous, fast, and ethical, vaccine efficacy trials is difficult, and the decisions and limitations in the design of these trials encompass epidemiological, logistical, regulatory, statistical, and ethical dimensions. RESULTS: Trial design decisions are complex and interrelated, but current guidance documents do not lend themselves to efficient decision-making. We created InterVax-Tool (http://vaxeval.com), an online, interactive decision-support tool, to help diverse stakeholders navigate the decisions in the design of phase III vaccine trials. InterVax-Tool offers high-level visual and interactive assistance through a set of four decision trees, guiding users through selection of the: (1) Primary Endpoint, (2) Target Population, (3) Randomization Scheme, and, (4) Comparator. We provide guidance on how key considerations - grouped as Epidemiological, Vaccine-related, Infrastructural, or Sociocultural - inform each decision in the trial design process. CONCLUSIONS: InterVax-Tool facilitates structured, transparent, and collaborative discussion of trial design, while recording the decision-making process. Users can save and share their decisions, which is useful both for comparing proposed trial designs, and for justifying particular design choices. Here, we describe the goals and features of InterVax-Tool as well as its application to the design of a Zika vaccine efficacy trial.