Safety and efficacy of malaria vaccine candidate R21/Matrix-M in African children: a multicentre, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Recently, we found that a new malaria vaccine, R21/Matrix-M, had over 75% efficacy against clinical malaria with seasonal administration in a phase 2b trial in Burkina Faso. Here, we report on safety and efficacy of the vaccine in a phase 3 trial enrolling over 4800 children across four countries followed for up to 18 months at seasonal sites and 12 months at standard sites. METHODS: We did a double-blind, randomised, phase 3 trial of the R21/Matrix-M malaria vaccine across five sites in four African countries with differing malaria transmission intensities and seasonality. Children (aged 5-36 months) were enrolled and randomly assigned (2:1) to receive 5 µg R21 plus 50 µg Matrix-M or a control vaccine (licensed rabies vaccine [Abhayrab]). Participants, their families, investigators, laboratory teams, and the local study team were masked to treatment. Vaccines were administered as three doses, 4 weeks apart, with a booster administered 12 months after the third dose. Half of the children were recruited at two sites with seasonal malaria transmission and the remainder at standard sites with perennial malaria transmission using age-based immunisation. The primary objective was protective efficacy of R21/Matrix-M from 14 days after third vaccination to 12 months after completion of the primary series at seasonal and standard sites separately as co-primary endpoints. Vaccine efficacy against multiple malaria episodes and severe malaria, as well as safety and immunogenicity, were also assessed. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04704830, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: From April 26, 2021, to Jan 12, 2022, 5477 children consented to be screened, of whom 1705 were randomly assigned to control vaccine and 3434 to R21/Matrix-M; 4878 participants received the first dose of vaccine. 3103 participants in the R21/Matrix-M group and 1541 participants in the control group were included in the modified per-protocol analysis (2412 [51·9%] male and 2232 [48·1%] female). R21/Matrix-M vaccine was well tolerated, with injection site pain (301 [18·6%] of 1615 participants) and fever (754 [46·7%] of 1615 participants) as the most frequent adverse events. Number of adverse events of special interest and serious adverse events did not significantly differ between the vaccine groups. There were no treatment-related deaths. 12-month vaccine efficacy was 75% (95% CI 71-79; p<0·0001) at the seasonal sites and 68% (61-74; p<0·0001) at the standard sites for time to first clinical malaria episode. Similarly, vaccine efficacy against multiple clinical malaria episodes was 75% (71-78; p<0·0001) at the seasonal sites and 67% (59-73; p<0·0001) at standard sites. A modest reduction in vaccine efficacy was observed over the first 12 months of follow-up, of similar size at seasonal and standard sites. A rate reduction of 868 (95% CI 762-974) cases per 1000 children-years at seasonal sites and 296 (231-362) at standard sites occurred over 12 months. Vaccine-induced antibodies against the conserved central Asn-Ala-Asn-Pro (NANP) repeat sequence of circumsporozoite protein correlated with vaccine efficacy. Higher NANP-specific antibody titres were observed in the 5-17 month age group compared with 18-36 month age group, and the younger age group had the highest 12-month vaccine efficacy on time to first clinical malaria episode at seasonal (79% [95% CI 73-84]; p<0·001) and standard (75% [65-83]; p<0·001) sites. INTERPRETATION: R21/Matrix-M was well tolerated and offered high efficacy against clinical malaria in African children. This low-cost, high-efficacy vaccine is already licensed by several African countries, and recently received a WHO policy recommendation and prequalification, offering large-scale supply to help reduce the great burden of malaria in sub-Saharan Africa. FUNDING: The Serum Institute of India, the Wellcome Trust, the UK National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, and Open Philanthropy.

Primaquine radical cure in patients with Plasmodium falciparum malaria in areas co-endemic for P falciparum and Plasmodium vivax (PRIMA): a multicentre, open-label, superiority randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In areas co-endemic for Plasmodium vivax and Plasmodium falciparum there is an increased risk of P vivax parasitaemia following P falciparum malaria. Radical cure is currently only recommended for patients presenting with P vivax malaria. Expanding the indication for radical cure to patients presenting with P falciparum malaria could reduce their risk of subsequent P vivax parasitaemia. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, superiority randomised controlled trial in five health clinics in Bangladesh, Indonesia, and Ethiopia. In Bangladesh and Indonesia, patients were excluded if they were younger than 1 year, whereas in Ethiopia patients were excluded if they were younger than 18 years. Patients with uncomplicated P falciparum monoinfection who had fever or a history of fever in the 48 h preceding clinic visit were eligible for enrolment and were required to have a glucose-6-dehydrogenase (G6PD) activity of 70% or greater. Patients received blood schizontocidal treatment (artemether-lumefantrine in Ethiopia and Bangladesh and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in Indonesia) and were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either high-dose short-course oral primaquine (intervention arm; total dose 7 mg/kg over 7 days) or standard care (standard care arm; single dose oral primaquine of 0·25 mg/kg). Random assignment was done by an independent statistician in blocks of eight by use of sealed envelopes. All randomly assigned and eligible patients were included in the primary and safety analyses. The per-protocol analysis excluded those who did not complete treatment or had substantial protocol violations. The primary endpoint was the incidence risk of P vivax parasitaemia on day 63. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03916003. FINDINGS: Between Aug 18, 2019, and March 14, 2022, a total of 500 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, and 495 eligible patients were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (246 intervention and 249 control). The incidence risk of P vivax parasitaemia at day 63 was 11·0% (95% CI 7·5-15·9) in the standard care arm compared with 2·5% (1·0-5·9) in the intervention arm (hazard ratio 0·20, 95% CI 0·08-0·51; p=0·0009). The effect size differed with blood schizontocidal treatment and site. Routine symptom reporting on day 2 and day 7 were similar between groups. In the first 42 days, there were a total of four primaquine-related adverse events reported in the standard care arm and 26 in the intervention arm; 132 (92%) of all 143 adverse events were mild. There were two serious adverse events in the intervention arm, which were considered unrelated to the study drug. None of the patients developed severe anaemia (defined as haemoglobin <5 g/dL). INTERPRETATION: In patients with a G6PD activity of 70% or greater, high-dose short-course primaquine was safe and relatively well tolerated and reduced the risk of subsequent P vivax parasitaemia within 63 days by five fold. Universal radical cure therefore potentially offers substantial clinical, public health, and operational benefits, but these benefits will vary with endemic setting. FUNDING: Australian Academy of Science Regional Collaborations Program, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and National Health and Medical Research Council.

Sharing results with participants (and community) in malaria related research: Perspectives and experience from researchers.

Results-sharing with participants or their communities after the completion of research is an essential element of ethical research. The main objective of this study was to identify and document current practice of trial result dissemination, to explore attitudes among trialists towards result dissemination and to better understand previous experiences and barriers to returning results to participants. This mixed-methods study used a sequential exploratory design with two phases: i) an initial qualitative phase to explore the topic and to inform the quantitative data collection, ii) a quantitative survey. Findings from the survey and interviews were triangulated and presented to a network of clinical malaria researchers for validation. A total of 11 semi-structured interviews (SSIs) were conducted using an interview guide. The quantitative survey had a response rate of 19.9% (42/211). Disseminating results to participants after clinical trials was deemed critical for ethical malaria related research, with 38.1% indicating it as extremely important and 45.2% rating it as mostly important. Most respondents referred to the dissemination of results to policymakers and wider stakeholders as important aspects of research translation. The practice of patient or community engagement was prioritized in the pre-trial period and during the trial for obvious instrumental goals of improving retention, coverage and adherence, but much less priority was given to the post-trial period. The main reason for poor dissemination practice was the notion that the time lag between study participation and the availability of results was too long (42.4%). Other reasons included the assumption that the community was not interested (36.4%), and financial restraints (9.1%). The rich qualitative data revealed detailed accounts of operational, cultural, educational and economic aspects that pose further barriers to results-sharing, including limited knowledge about best practice. Better planning which includes adequate financial resourcing is required for meaningful dissemination of results to study participants. Improved institutional guidance and more stringent requirements by funders could support researchers who are generally interested and willing to complete the process. Best practice methods to conduct such dissemination remains to be explored.

Adapting international clinical trials during COVID-19 and beyond.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic and resulting restrictions, particularly travel restrictions, have had significant impact on the conduct of global clinical trials. Our clinical trials programme, which relied on in-person visits for training, monitoring and capacity building across nine low- and middle-income countries, had to adapt to those unprecedented operational challenges. We report the adaptation of our working model with a focus on the operational areas of training, monitoring and cross-site collaboration. THE NEW WORKING MODEL: Adaptations include changing training strategies from in-person site visits with three or four team members to a multi-pronged virtual approach, with generic online training for good clinical practice, the development of a library of study-specific training videos, and interactive virtual training sessions, including practical laboratory-focused training sessions. We also report changes from in-person monitoring to remote monitoring as well as the development of a more localized network of clinical trial monitors to support hybrid models with in-person and remote monitoring depending on identified risks at each site. We established a virtual network across different trial and study sites with the objective to further build capacity for good clinical practice-compliant antimalarial trials and foster cross-country and cross-study site collaboration. CONCLUSION: The forced adaptation of these new strategies has come with advantages that we did not envisage initially. This includes improved, more frequent engagement through the established network with opportunities for increased south-to-south support and a substantially reduced carbon footprint and budget savings. Our new approach is challenging for study sites with limited prior experience but this can be overcome with hybrid models. Capacity building for laboratory-based work remains difficult using a virtual environment. The changes to our working model are likely to last, even after the end of the pandemic, providing a more sustainable and equitable approach to our research.

Reducing the risk of Plasmodium vivax after falciparum infections in co-endemic areas-a randomized controlled trial (PRIMA).

BACKGROUND: Plasmodium vivax forms dormant liver stages that can reactivate weeks or months following an acute infection. Recurrent infections are often associated with a febrile illness and can cause a cumulative risk of severe anaemia, direct and indirect mortality, and onward transmission of the parasite. There is an increased risk of P. vivax parasitaemia following falciparum malaria suggesting a rationale for universal use of radically curative treatment in patients with P. falciparum malaria even in the absence of detectable P. vivax parasitaemia in areas that are co-endemic for both species. METHODS: This is a multicentre, health care facility-based, randomized, controlled, open-label trial in Bangladesh, Indonesia and Ethiopia. Patients with uncomplicated falciparum malaria, G6PD activity of ≥70% of the adjusted male median (AMM) and haemoglobin levels ≥8g/dl are recruited into the study and randomized to either receive standard schizonticidal treatment plus 7-day high dose primaquine (total dose 7mg/kg) or standard care in a 1:1 ratio. Patients are followed up weekly until day 63. The primary endpoint is the incidence risk of any P. vivax parasitemia on day 63. Secondary endpoints include incidence risk on day 63 of symptomatic P. vivax malaria and the risk of any P. falciparum parasitaemia. Secondary safety outcomes include the proportion of adverse events and serious adverse events, the incidence risk of severe anaemia (Hb<5g/dl and <7g/dl) and/or the risk for blood transfusion, the incidence risk of ≥ 25% fall in haemoglobin with and without haemoglobinuria, and the incidence risk of ≥ 25% fall in haemoglobin to under 7g/dl with and without haemoglobinuria. DISCUSSION: This study evaluates the potential benefit of a universal radical cure for both P. vivax and P. falciparum in different endemic locations. If found safe and effective universal radical cure could represent a cost-effective approach to clear otherwise unrecognised P. vivax infections and hence accelerate P. vivax elimination. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03916003 . Registered on 12 April 2019.

Investigating Genetic and Other Determinants of First-Onset Myocardial Infarction in Malaysia: Protocol for the Malaysian Acute Vascular Events Risk Study.

BACKGROUND: Although the burden of premature myocardial infarction (MI) is high in Malaysia, direct evidence on the determinants of MI in this multi-ethnic population remains sparse. OBJECTIVE: The Malaysian Acute Vascular Events Risk (MAVERIK) study is a retrospective case-control study established to investigate the genomic, lipid-related, and other determinants of acute MI in Malaysia. In this paper, we report the study protocol and early results. METHODS: By June 2019, we had enrolled approximately 2500 patients with their first MI and 2500 controls without cardiovascular disease, who were frequency-matched by age, sex, and ethnicity, from 17 hospitals in Malaysia. For each participant, serum and whole blood have been collected and stored. Clinical, demographic, and behavioral information has been obtained using a 200-item questionnaire. RESULTS: Tobacco consumption, a history of diabetes, hypertension, markers of visceral adiposity, indicators of lower socioeconomic status, and a family history of coronary disease were more prevalent in cases than in controls. Adjusted (age and sex) logistic regression models for traditional risk factors indicated that current smoking (odds ratio [OR] 4.11, 95% CI 3.56-4.75; P<.001), previous smoking (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.12-1.60; P=.001), a history of high blood pressure (OR 2.13, 95% CI 1.86-2.44; P<.001), a history of diabetes mellitus (OR 2.72, 95% CI 2.34-3.17; P<.001), a family history of coronary heart disease (OR 1.28, 95% CI 1.07-1.55; P=.009), and obesity (BMI >30 kg/m2; OR 1.19, 95% CI 1.05-1.34; P=.009) were associated with MI in age- and sex-adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: The MAVERIK study can serve as a useful platform to investigate genetic and other risk factors for MI in an understudied Southeast Asian population. It should help to hasten the discovery of disease-causing pathways and inform regionally appropriate strategies that optimize public health action. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): RR1-10.2196/31885.

Dengue outbreak 2019: clinical and laboratory profiles of dengue virus infection in Dhaka city.

BACKGROUND: Dengue fever has been one of the most common mosquito-transmitted diseases in the world, affecting more than 128 countries in both tropical and subtropical regions. Bangladesh has been sufferring from dengue outbreaks almost annually since 2000, and in 2019, Bangladesh faced the worst outbreak of dengue to date. This study aimed to provide clinical and biochemical profiles of Bangladesh's dengue-infected patients. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted from August through December 2019 in three tertiary private hospitals in Dhaka, Bangladesh. We collected information on demographic data, clinical characteristics, and laboratory profiles for 542 confirmed hospitalized acute dengue cases using a structured questionnaire. RESULTS: The average age of the enrolled patients was 26.15 years, and about 50% of patients belonged to the age group of 20-40 years. The most frequent among the prevalent clinical symptoms were fever (93.1%), abdominal pain (29.5%), skin rash (25.3%), and diarrhea (19.7%). 316 patients had some complications, such as breathing problems (41.4%), pleural effusion (38.9%), gum bleeding (11.1%), etc. More than 90% of the patients showed seropositivity for the DENV-NS1 antigen. CONCLUSIONS: Over the last couple of years, dengue fever has become a major health issue for Bangladesh. To reduce the burden of this disease, timely diagnosis and prompt treatment are necessary. This analysis thus yields the clinical features, laboratory profiles, and seropositivity test results of dengue patients from Bangladesh. The research results may help clinicians understand the circumstantial diagnosis of dengue patients and facilitate early intervention.

Disseminating clinical study results to trial participants in Ethiopia: insights and lessons learned.

International regulatory authorities and funders require that research be disseminated promptly and appropriately to all involved stakeholders. However, following completion of clinical trials participants often either do not receive any feedback or materials provided are not appropriate for the context. The investigators of a multicentre anti-malarial clinical trial (the IMPROV study) conducted a dissemination meeting at one of the study sites in Ethiopia; trial participants and medical staff were provided feedback on the study results. This report summarizes the dissemination strategies adopted by the investigators, including a plain language visual aid and simple communication techniques. Lessons learned are reported with a discussion on the operational challenges to dissemination of clinical trials in resource limited settings.

Experimental hut evaluation of a novel long-lasting non-pyrethroid durable wall lining for control of pyrethroid-resistant Anopheles gambiae and Anopheles funestus in Tanzania.

BACKGROUND: A novel, insecticide-treated, durable wall lining (ITWL), which mimics indoor residual spraying (IRS), has been developed to provide prolonged vector control when fixed to the inner walls of houses. PermaNet® ITWL is a polypropylene material containing non-pyrethroids (abamectin and fenpyroximate) which migrate gradually to the surface. METHODS: An experimental hut trial was conducted in an area of pyrethroid-resistant Anopheles gambiae s.l. and Anopheles funestus s.s. to compare the efficacy of non-pyrethroid ITWL, long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLIN) (Interceptor®), pyrethroid ITWL (ZeroVector®), and non-pyrethroid ITWL + LLIN. RESULTS: The non-pyrethroid ITWL produced relatively low levels of mortality, between 40-50% for An. funestus and An. gambiae, across all treatments. Against An. funestus, the non-pyrethroid ITWL when used without LLIN produced 47% mortality but this level of mortality was not significantly different to that of the LLIN alone (29%, P = 0.306) or ITWL + LLIN (35%, P = 0.385). Mortality levels for An. gambiae were similar to An. funestus with non-pyrethroid ITWL, producing 43% mortality compared with 26% for the LLIN. Exiting rates from ITWL huts were similar to the control and highest when the LLIN was present. An attempt to restrict mosquito access by covering the eave gap with ITWL (one eave open vs four open) had no effect on numbers entering. The LLIN provided personal protection when added to the ITWL with only 30% blood-fed compared with 69 and 56% (P = 0.001) for ITWL alone. Cone bioassays on ITWL with 30 min exposure after the trial produced mortality of >90% using field An. gambiae. CONCLUSIONS: Despite high mortality in bioassays, the hut trial produced only limited mortality which was attributed to pyrethroid resistance against the pyrethroid ITWL and low efficacy in the non-pyrethroid ITWL. Hut ceilings were left uncovered and may have served as a potential untreated refuge. By analogy to IRS campaigns, which also do not routinely treat ceilings, high community coverage with ITWL may still reduce malaria transmission. Restriction of eave gaps by 75% proved an inadequate barrier to mosquito entry. The findings represent the first 2 months after installation and do not necessarily predict long-term efficacy.

The effectiveness of non-pyrethroid insecticide-treated durable wall lining to control malaria in rural Tanzania: study protocol for a two-armed cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite considerable reductions in malaria achieved by scaling-up long-lasting insecticidal nets (LLINs) and indoor residual spraying (IRS), maintaining sustained community protection remains operationally challenging. Increasing insecticide resistance also threatens to jeopardize the future of both strategies. Non-pyrethroid insecticide-treated wall lining (ITWL) may represent an alternate or complementary control method and a potential tool to manage insecticide resistance. To date no study has demonstrated whether ITWL can reduce malaria transmission nor provide additional protection beyond the current best practice of universal coverage (UC) of LLINs and prompt case management. METHODS/DESIGN: A two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial will be conducted in rural Tanzania to assess whether non-pyrethroid ITWL and UC of LLINs provide added protection against malaria infection in children, compared to UC of LLINs alone. Stratified randomization based on malaria prevalence will be used to select 22 village clusters per arm. All 44 clusters will receive LLINs and half will also have ITWL installed on interior house walls. Study children, aged 6 months to 11 years old, will be enrolled from each cluster and followed monthly to estimate cumulative incidence of malaria parasitaemia (primary endpoint), time to first malaria episode and prevalence of anaemia before and after intervention. Entomological inoculation rate will be estimated using indoor CDC light traps and outdoor tent traps followed by detection of Anopheles gambiae species, sporozoite infection, insecticide resistance and blood meal source. ITWL bioefficacy and durability will be monitored using WHO cone bioassays and household surveys, respectively. Social and cultural factors influencing community and household ITWL acceptability will be explored through focus-group discussions and in-depth interviews. Cost-effectiveness, compared between study arms, will be estimated per malaria case averted. DISCUSSION: This protocol describes the large-scale evaluation of a novel vector control product, designed to overcome some of the known limitations of existing methods. If ITWL is proven to be effective and durable under field conditions, it may warrant consideration for programmatic implementation, particularly in areas with long transmission seasons and where pyrethroid-resistant vectors predominate. Trial findings will provide crucial information for policy makers in Tanzania and other malaria-endemic countries to guide resource allocations for future control efforts. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02533336 registered on 13 July 2014.