Immunogenicity and safety of fractional doses of 17D-213 yellow fever vaccine in HIV-infected people in Kenya (YEFE): a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority substudy of a phase 4 trial.

BACKGROUND: Evidence indicates that fractional doses of yellow fever vaccine are safe and sufficiently immunogenic for use during yellow fever outbreaks. However, there are no data on the generalisability of this observation to populations living with HIV. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the immunogenicity of fractional and standard doses of yellow fever vaccine in HIV-positive adults. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority substudy in Kilifi, coastal Kenya to compare the immunogenicity and safety of a fractional dose (one-fifth of the standard dose) versus the standard dose of 17D-213 yellow fever vaccine among HIV-positive volunteers. HIV-positive participants aged 18-59 years, with baseline CD4+ T-cell count of at least 200 cells per mL, and who were not pregnant, had no previous history of yellow fever vaccination or infection, and had no contraindication for yellow fever vaccination were recruited from the community. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 in blocks (variable block sizes) to either a fractional dose or a standard dose of the 17D-213 yellow fever vaccine. Vaccines were administered subcutaneously by an unblinded nurse and pharmacist; all other study personnel were blinded to the vaccine allocation. The primary outcome of the study was the proportion of participants who seroconverted by the plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT50) 28 days after vaccination for the fractional dose versus the standard dose in the per-protocol population. Secondary outcomes were assessment of adverse events and immunogenicity during the 1-year follow-up period. Participants were considered to have seroconverted if the post-vaccination antibody titre was at least 4 times greater than the pre-vaccination titre. We set a non-inferiority margin of not less than a 17% decrease in seroconversion in the fractional dose compared with the standard dose. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02991495. FINDINGS: Between Jan 29, 2019, and May 17, 2019, 303 participants were screened, and 250 participants were included and vaccinated; 126 participants were assigned to the fractional dose and 124 to the standard dose. 28 days after vaccination, 112 (96%, 95% CI 90-99) of 117 participants in the fractional dose group and 115 (98%, 94-100) of 117 in the standard dose group seroconverted by PRNT50. The difference in seroconversion between the fractional dose and the standard dose was -3% (95% CI -7 to 2). Fractional dosing therefore met the non-inferiority criterion, and non-inferiority was maintained for 1 year. The most common adverse events were headache (n=31 [12%]), fatigue (n=23 [9%]), myalgia (n=23 [9%]), and cough (n=14 [6%]). Reported adverse events were either mild (182 [97%] of 187 adverse events) or moderate (5 [3%]) and were self-limiting. INTERPRETATION: Fractional doses of the 17D-213 yellow fever vaccine were sufficiently immunogenic and safe demonstrating non-inferiority to the standard vaccine dose in HIV-infected individuals with CD4+ T cell counts of at least 200 cells per mL. These results provide confidence that fractional dose recommendations are applicable to populations with high HIV prevalence. FUNDING: Wellcome Trust, Médecins Sans Frontières Foundation, and the UK Department for International Development.

Immunogenicity and safety of fractional doses of 17D-213 yellow fever vaccine in children (YEFE): a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority substudy of a phase 4 trial.

BACKGROUND: Current supply shortages constrain yellow fever vaccination activities, particularly outbreak response. Although fractional doses of all WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines have been shown to be safe and immunogenic in a randomised controlled trial in adults, they have not been evaluated in a randomised controlled trial in young children (9-59 months old). We aimed to assess the immunogenicity and safety of fractional doses compared with standard doses of the WHO-prequalified 17D-213 vaccine in young children. METHODS: This substudy of the YEFE phase 4 study was conducted at the Epicentre Mbarara Research Centre (Mbarara, Uganda). Eligible children were aged 9-59 months without contraindications for vaccination, without history of previous yellow fever vaccination or infection and not requiring yellow fever vaccination for travelling. Participants were randomly assigned, using block randomisation, 1:1 to standard or fractional (one-fifth) dose of yellow fever vaccine. Investigators, participants, and laboratory personnel were blinded to group allocation. Participants were followed for immunogenicity and safety at 10 days, 28 days, and 1 year after vaccination. The primary outcome was non-inferiority in seroconversion (-10 percentage point margin) 28 days after vaccination measured by 50% plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT50) in the per-protocol population. Safety and seroconversion at 10 days and 12-16 months after vaccination (given COVID-19 resctrictions) were secondary outcomes. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02991495. FINDINGS: Between Feb 20, 2019, and Sept 9, 2019, 433 children were assessed, and 420 were randomly assigned to fractional dose (n=210) and to standard dose (n=210) 17D-213 vaccination. 28 days after vaccination, 202 (97%, 95% CI 95-99) of 207 participants in the fractional dose group and 191 (100%, 98-100) of 191 in the standard dose group seroconverted. The absolute difference in seroconversion between the study groups in the per-protocol population was -2 percentage points (95% CI -5 to 1). 154 (73%) of 210 participants in the fractional dose group and 168 (80%) of 210 in the standard dose group reported at least one adverse event 28 days after vaccination. At 10 days follow-up, seroconversion was lower in the fractional dose group than in the standard dose group. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infections (n=221 [53%]), diarrhoea (n=68 [16%]), rhinorrhoea (n=49 [12%]), and conjunctivitis (n=28 [7%]). No difference was observed in incidence of adverse events and serious adverse events between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Fractional doses of the 17D-213 vaccine were non-inferior to standard doses in inducing seroconversion 28 days after vaccination in children aged 9-59 months when assessed with PRNT50, but we found fewer children seroconverted at 10 days. The results support consideration of the use of fractional dose of yellow fever vaccines in WHO recommendations for outbreak response in the event of a yellow fever vaccine shortage to include children. FUNDING: Médecins Sans Frontières Foundation.

Immunogenicity and safety of fractional doses of yellow fever vaccines: a randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Stocks of yellow fever vaccine are insufficient to cover exceptional demands for outbreak response. Fractional dosing has shown efficacy, but evidence is limited to the 17DD substrain vaccine. We assessed the immunogenicity and safety of one-fifth fractional dose compared with standard dose of four WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines produced from three substrains. METHODS: We did this randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial at research centres in Mbarara, Uganda, and Kilifi, Kenya. Eligible participants were aged 18-59 years, had no contraindications for vaccination, were not pregnant or lactating, had no history of yellow fever vaccination or infection, and did not require yellow fever vaccination for travel. Eligible participants were recruited from communities and randomly assigned to one of eight groups, corresponding to the four vaccines at standard or fractional dose. The vaccine was administered subcutaneously by nurses who were not masked to treatment, but participants and other study personnel were masked to vaccine allocation. The primary outcome was proportion of participants with seroconversion 28 days after vaccination. Seroconversion was defined as post-vaccination neutralising antibody titres at least 4 times pre-vaccination measurement measured by 50% plaque reduction neutralisation test (PRNT50). We defined non-inferiority as less than 10% decrease in seroconversion in fractional compared with standard dose groups 28 days after vaccination. The primary outcome was measured in the per-protocol population, and safety analyses included all vaccinated participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02991495. FINDINGS: Between Nov 6, 2017, and Feb 21, 2018, 1029 participants were assessed for inclusion. 69 people were ineligible, and 960 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to vaccine manufacturer and dose (120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz standard dose, 120 to Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz fractional dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides standard dose, 120 to Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides fractional dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar standard dose, 120 to Institut Pasteur Dakar fractional dose, 120 to Sanofi Pasteur standard dose, and 120 to Sanofi Pasteur fractional dose). 49 participants had detectable PRNT50 at baseline and 11 had missing PRNT50 results at baseline or 28 days. 900 were included in the per-protocol analysis. 959 participants were included in the safety analysis. The absolute difference in seroconversion between fractional and standard doses by vaccine was 1·71% (95% CI -2·60 to 5·28) for Bio-Manguinhos-Fiocruz, -0·90% (-4·24 to 3·13) for Chumakov Institute of Poliomyelitis and Viral Encephalitides, 1·82% (-2·75 to 5·39) for Institut Pasteur Dakar, and 0·0% (-3·32 to 3·29) for Sanofi Pasteur. Fractional doses from all four vaccines met the non-inferiority criterion. The most common treatment-related adverse events were headache (22·2%), fatigue (13·7%), myalgia (13·3%) and self-reported fever (9·0%). There were no study-vaccine related serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: Fractional doses of all WHO-prequalified yellow fever vaccines were non-inferior to the standard dose in inducing seroconversion 28 days after vaccination, with no major safety concerns. These results support the use of fractional dosage in the general adult population for outbreak response in situations of vaccine shortage. FUNDING: The study was funded by Médecins Sans Frontières Foundation, Wellcome Trust (grant no. 092654), and the UK Department for International Development. Vaccines were donated in kind.

Humoral and cellular immune response induced by rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP vaccine among frontline workers during the 2013-2016 West Africa Ebola outbreak in Guinea.

BACKGROUND: As part of a Phase III trial with the Ebola vaccine rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP in Guinea, we invited frontline workers (FLWs) to participate in a sub-study to provide additional information on the immunogenicity of the vaccine. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, non-randomized, single-arm immunogenicity evaluation of one dose of rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP among healthy FLWs in Guinea. FLWs who refused vaccination were offered to participate as a control group. We followed participants for 84 days with a subset followed-up for 180 days. The primary endpoint was immune response, as measured by ELISA for ZEBOV-glycoprotein-specific antibodies (ELISA-GP) at 28 days. We also conducted neutralization, whole virion ELISA and enzyme-linked immunospot (ELISPOT) assay for cellular response. RESULTS: A total of 1172 participants received one dose of vaccine and were followed-up for 84 days, among them 114 participants were followed-up for 180 days. Additionally, 99 participants were included in the control group and followed up for 180 days. Overall, 86.4% (95% CI 84.1-88.4) of vaccinated participants seroresponded at 28 days post-vaccination (ELISA- GP) with 65% of these seroresponding at 14 days post-vaccination. Among those who seroresponded at 28 days, 90.7% (95% CI 82.0-95.4) were still seropositive at 180 days. The proportion of seropositivity in the unvaccinated group was 0.0% (95% CI 0.0-3.8) at 28 days and 5.4% (95% CI 2.1-13.1) at 180 days post-vaccination. We found weak correlation between ELISA-GP and neutralization at baseline but significant pairwise correlation at 28 days post-vaccination. Among samples analysed for cellular response, only 1 (2.2%) exhibited responses towards the Zaire Ebola glycoprotein (Ebola GP ≥ 10) at baseline, 10 (13.5%) at day 28 post-vaccination and 27 (48.2%) at Day 180. CONCLUSIONS: We found one dose of rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP to be highly immunogenic at 28- and 180-days post vaccination among frontline workers in Guinea. We also found a cellular response that increased with time.

Evaluation of the stability of measles vaccine out of the cold chain under extended controlled temperature conditions.

Measles outbreaks occur periodically in remote and difficult to reach areas in countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo. The possibility to keep measles vaccines at temperatures outside the cold chain for a limited period prior to administration would be an advantage for organizations such as Médecins Sans Frontières, which repeatedly respond to measles outbreaks in difficult contexts. Using stability data at 37 °C and 40 °C provided by Serum Institute of India Private Limited we applied the product release model for Extended Controlled Temperature Conditions (ECTC) to evaluate the possibility of an out of the cold chain excursion. Measles vaccine in the lyophilized form remains above the minimum required potency at the end of the shelf-life for up to 6 days at 37 °C or for 2 days at 40 °C. This evaluation supports the use of a monodose presentation of measles vaccine in ECTC. This could be an advantage for outbreak response in isolated and difficult to reach areas. However the operational advantages of this approach need to be established.

Factors influencing participation in an Ebola vaccine trial among front-line workers in Guinea.

BACKGROUND: Alongside the clinical aspects of the immunogenicity and safety trial of an Ebola vaccine deployed among front-line workers, a qualitative study was conducted to describe motivations behind individuals' decisions to participate - or not to participate - in the study. METHODS: In July and August 2015, focus group discussions and semi-structured individual interviews were conducted in Conakry, Guinea. Individuals were eligible for the qualitative study if they met the inclusion criteria of the immunogenicity and safety study irrespective of their participation. Surveys were also conducted among several institution and department heads of staff included in the study as well as vaccine trial staff members. Discussion and interview transcripts were analyzed using content thematic analysis. RESULTS: Interviews and focus groups were conducted among 110 persons, of whom about two-thirds (67%) participated in the vaccine trial. There was at least one group interview conducted at each participating trial site, along with numerous formal and informal interviews and conversations through the enrollment period. Participants were often motivated by a desire to save and protect themselves and others, contribute to scientific progress, or lead by example. Non-participants expressed concerns regarding the risk and costs of participation, particularly the fear of unknown side effects following vaccination, and distrust or fear of stigmatization. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the unique nature of the 2014-2015 Ebola outbreak, front-line workers employed much of the same logic when choosing to participate as in other clinical trials in similar settings. Special consideration should be given to addressing perceived inequity, misunderstanding, and mistrust among the target populations in future trials. Clinical trial registry number: This trial is registered with the Pan African Clinical Trials Registry, number PACTR201503001057193.

Safety of the rVSV ZEBOV vaccine against Ebola Zaire among frontline workers in Guinea.

BACKGROUND: As part of the ring vaccination trial in Guinea, Front Line Workers were invited to participate in a sub-study to provide additional information on the immunogenicity and safety of rVSVΔG/ZEBOV-GP. Here we summarize the information on the safety follow-up. METHODS: An open-label, non-randomized, immunogenicity evaluation of one dose of rVSVΔG/ZEBOV-GP was conducted in Conakry, Guinea between March 2015 and July 2016. Front-line workers refusing vaccination were invited to participate as a control group. Participants were followed for 3 months with a subset followed-up for 6 months after vaccination. Women becoming pregnant during the follow-up were followed until pregnancy outcome. Solicited and unsolicited adverse events were monitored at each contact with participants using standardized study forms. RESULTS: 2016 vaccinated participants and 99 controls were included in the safety cohort. On the 3 days post-vaccination visit adverse events were very common, with over 70% of participants reporting at least one adverse event. The most frequently reported symptoms were headache, fatigue, arthralgia, subjective fever and myalgia. Among participants that completed fever diaries (n = 887), post-vaccination fever was reported by 15.22%. Comparing to the unvaccinated group, local reaction, fatigue, headache, arthralgia, myalgia and subjective fever occurring within the first 3 days post-vaccination were statistically significantly different in the vaccinated group compared to the unvaccinated. A total of 8 Serious Adverse Events were identified during follow-up. 2 SAEs were related to pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: Results confirm that adverse events 3 days after vaccination with the rVSV candidate vaccine are common. The occurrence of fever is of particular concern in the context of ongoing Ebola transmission. Additional studies should address important data gaps regarding the use of the vaccine in pregnancy and other vulnerable populations.

Measles seroprevalence in Chiradzulu district, Malawi: Implications for evaluating vaccine coverage.

INTRODUCTION: Self-reported measles vaccination coverage is frequently used to inform vaccination strategies in resource-poor settings. However, little is known to what extent this is a reliable indicator of underlying seroprotection, information that could provide guidance ensuring the success of measles control and elimination strategies. METHODS: As part of a study exploring HIV infection and measles susceptibility, we conveniently sampled consenting HIV-uninfected patients presenting at the HIV voluntary counselling and testing centre, and HIV-infected patients presenting for regular care, in Chiradzulu district hospital, Malawi, between January and September 2012. RESULTS: A total of 2106 participants were recruited between January and September 2012, three quarters of whom were HIV positive. Vaccination cards were available for just 7 participants (0.36%). 91.9% of participants were measles seropositive. Older age (OR=1.11 per year increase in age; 95%CI: 1.09-1.14) and being female (OR=1.90; 95%CI: 1.26-2.87) were both associated with significantly increased odds for seroprotection. Prior vaccination history was associated with lower odds (Odds Ratio (OR)=0.44; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.22-0.85) for confirmed seropositivity. Previous measles infection was not significantly associated with seroprotection (OR=1.31; 95%CI: 0.49-3.51). Protection by history and serological status were concordant for 64.3% of participants <35 years old. However, analysis by age group reveals important differences in concordance between the ages, with a greater degree of discordance among younger ages. Vaccination and/or infection history as a predictor of seropositivity was 75.8% sensitive, but just 10.3% specific. CONCLUSION: Reported vaccination and previous infection were poor predictors of seropositivity, suggesting these may be unreliable indicators of seroprotection status. Such serosurveys may be indicated in similar settings in which overestimation of the proportion of seroprotected individuals could have important ramifications if used to guide vaccination strategies.

A cluster randomized non-inferiority field trial on the immunogenicity and safety of tetanus toxoid vaccine kept in controlled temperature chain compared to cold chain.

BACKGROUND: In resource-poor settings, cold chain requirements present barriers for vaccine delivery. We evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of tetanus toxoid (TT) vaccine in "Controlled Temperature Chain" (CTC; up to 40 °C for <30 days before administration), compared to standard cold chain (SCC; 2-8 °C). Prior to the study, stability parameters of TT-CTC were shown to meet international requirements. METHODS: A cluster randomized, non-inferiority trial was conducted in Moïssala district, Chad, December 2012-March 2013. Thirty-four included clusters were randomized to CTC or SCC. Women aged 14-49 years, eligible for TT vaccination and with a history of ≤1 TT dose, received two TT doses 4 weeks apart. Participants were blinded to allocation strategy. Tetanus antibody titers were measured using standard ELISA at inclusion and 4 weeks post-TT2. Primary outcome measures were post-vaccination seroconversion and fold-increase in geometric mean concentrations (GMC). Non-inferiority was by seroconversion difference (TTSCC-TTCTC) <5% and ratio of GMCs (TTSCC/TTCTC) <1.5. Adverse events were monitored at health centers and at next contact with participants. RESULTS: A total of 2128 women (CTC=1068; SCC=1060) were recruited. Primary intention to vaccinate analysis included 1830 participants; 272 of these were included in the seroconversion analysis. Seroconversion was reached by >95% of participants; upper 95%CI of the difference was 5.6%. Increases in GMC were over 4-fold; upper 95%CI of GMC ratio was 1.36 in the adjusted analysis. Few adverse events were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the immunogenicity and safety of TT in CTC at <40 °C for <30 days. The high proportion of participants protected at baseline results in a reduction of power to detect a 5% non-inferiority margin. However, results at a 10% non-inferiority margin, the comparable GMC increases and vaccine's stability demonstrated in the preliminary phase indicate that CTC can be an alternative strategy for TT delivery in situations where cold chain cannot be maintained.

Vaccination in humanitarian crises: satisficing should no longer suffice.

There are more possible vaccination interventions to mitigate the adverse health consequences of populations in crises than ever before, but recent reviews suggest delivering these vaccines has been fraught with difficulty. The decision to implement vaccination interventions in crises remains, more often than not, an exercise in satisficing. The sparse credible epidemiologic and effectiveness data in populations affected by crises contributes greatly to decision-making difficulty, as do the limits of vaccine presentations, formulations and storage. Political considerations and lack of decision-making guidance contribute further. Moving forward requires sound effectiveness studies to help ensure that decision-making is based to the degree possible on substance.

Local discrepancies in measles vaccination opportunities: results of population-based surveys in Sub-Saharan Africa.

BACKGROUND: The World Health Organization recommends African children receive two doses of measles containing vaccine (MCV) through routine programs or supplemental immunization activities (SIA). Moreover, children have an additional opportunity to receive MCV through outbreak response immunization (ORI) mass campaigns in certain contexts. Here, we present the results of MCV coverage by dose estimated through surveys conducted after outbreak response in diverse settings in Sub-Saharan Africa. METHODS: We included 24 household-based surveys conducted in six countries after a non-selective mass vaccination campaign. In the majority (22/24), the survey sample was selected using probability proportional to size cluster-based sampling. Others used Lot Quality Assurance Sampling. RESULTS: In total, data were collected on 60,895 children from 2005 to 2011. Routine coverage varied between countries (>95% in Malawi and Kirundo province (Burundi) while <35% in N'Djamena (Chad) in 2005), within a country and over time. SIA coverage was <75% in most settings. ORI coverage ranged from >95% in Malawi to 71.4% [95% CI: 68.9-73.8] in N'Djamena (Chad) in 2005.In five sites, >5% of children remained unvaccinated after several opportunities. Conversely, in Malawi and DRC, over half of the children eligible for the last SIA received a third dose of MCV. CONCLUSIONS: Control pre-elimination targets were still not reached, contributing to the occurrence of repeated measles outbreak in the Sub-Saharan African countries reported here. Although children receiving a dose of MCV through outbreak response benefit from the intervention, ensuring that programs effectively target hard to reach children remains the cornerstone of measles control.