Subcutaneous Administration of a Monoclonal Antibody to Prevent Malaria.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous administration of the monoclonal antibody L9LS protected adults against controlled Plasmodium falciparum infection in a phase 1 trial. Whether a monoclonal antibody administered subcutaneously can protect children from P. falciparum infection in a region where this organism is endemic is unclear. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 trial in Mali to assess the safety and efficacy of subcutaneous administration of L9LS in children 6 to 10 years of age over a 6-month malaria season. In part A of the trial, safety was assessed at three dose levels in adults, followed by assessment at two dose levels in children. In part B of the trial, children were randomly assigned, in a 1:1:1 ratio, to receive 150 mg of L9LS, 300 mg of L9LS, or placebo. The primary efficacy end point, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was the first P. falciparum infection, as detected on blood smear performed at least every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. A secondary efficacy end point was the first episode of clinical malaria, as assessed in a time-to-event analysis. RESULTS: No safety concerns were identified in the dose-escalation part of the trial (part A). In part B, 225 children underwent randomization, with 75 children assigned to each group. No safety concerns were identified in part B. P. falciparum infection occurred in 36 participants (48%) in the 150-mg group, in 30 (40%) in the 300-mg group, and in 61 (81%) in the placebo group. The efficacy of L9LS against P. falciparum infection, as compared with placebo, was 66% (adjusted confidence interval [95% CI], 45 to 79) with the 150-mg dose and 70% (adjusted 95% CI, 50 to 82) with the 300-mg dose (P<0.001 for both comparisons). Efficacy against clinical malaria was 67% (adjusted 95% CI, 39 to 82) with the 150-mg dose and 77% (adjusted 95% CI, 55 to 89) with the 300-mg dose (P<0.001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous administration of L9LS to children was protective against P. falciparum infection and clinical malaria over a period of 6 months. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05304611.).

Safety and Efficacy of a Monoclonal Antibody against Malaria in Mali.

BACKGROUND: CIS43LS is a monoclonal antibody that was shown to protect against controlled Plasmodium falciparum infection in a phase 1 clinical trial. Whether a monoclonal antibody can prevent P. falciparum infection in a region in which the infection is endemic is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 trial to assess the safety and efficacy of a single intravenous infusion of CIS43LS against P. falciparum infection in healthy adults in Mali over a 6-month malaria season. In Part A, safety was assessed at three escalating dose levels. In Part B, participants were randomly assigned (in a 1:1:1 ratio) to receive 10 mg of CIS43LS per kilogram of body weight, 40 mg of CIS43LS per kilogram, or placebo. The primary efficacy end point, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was the first P. falciparum infection detected on blood-smear examination, which was performed at least every 2 weeks for 24 weeks. At enrollment, all the participants received artemether-lumefantrine to clear possible P. falciparum infection. RESULTS: In Part B, 330 adults underwent randomization; 110 were assigned to each trial group. The risk of moderate headache was 3.3 times as high with 40 mg of CIS43LS per kilogram as with placebo. P. falciparum infections were detected on blood-smear examination in 39 participants (35.5%) who received 10 mg of CIS43LS per kilogram, 20 (18.2%) who received 40 mg of CIS43LS per kilogram, and 86 (78.2%) who received placebo. At 6 months, the efficacy of 40 mg of CIS43LS per kilogram as compared with placebo was 88.2% (adjusted 95% confidence interval [CI], 79.3 to 93.3; P<0.001), and the efficacy of 10 mg of CIS43LS per kilogram as compared with placebo was 75.0% (adjusted 95% CI, 61.0 to 84.0; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: CIS43LS was protective against P. falciparum infection over a 6-month malaria season in Mali without evident safety concerns. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04329104.).

Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of the chimpanzee adenovirus type 3-vectored Marburg virus (cAd3-Marburg) vaccine in healthy adults in the USA: a first-in-human, phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation trial.

BACKGROUND: WHO has identified Marburg virus as an emerging virus requiring urgent vaccine research and development, particularly due to its recent emergence in Ghana. We report results from a first-in-human clinical trial evaluating a replication-deficient recombinant chimpanzee adenovirus type 3 (cAd3)-vectored vaccine encoding a wild-type Marburg virus Angola glycoprotein (cAd3-Marburg) in healthy adults. METHODS: We did a first-in-human, phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation trial of the cAd3-Marburg vaccine at the Walter Reed Army Institute of Research Clinical Trials Center in the USA. Healthy adults aged 18-50 years were assigned to receive a single intramuscular dose of cAd3-Marburg vaccine at either 1 × 1010 or 1 × 1011 particle units (pu). Primary safety endpoints included reactogenicity assessed for the first 7 days and all adverse events assessed for 28 days after vaccination. Secondary immunogenicity endpoints were assessment of binding antibody responses and T-cell responses against the Marburg virus glycoprotein insert, and assessment of neutralising antibody responses against the cAd3 vector 4 weeks after vaccination. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03475056. FINDINGS: Between Oct 9, 2018, and Jan 31, 2019, 40 healthy adults were enrolled and assigned to receive a single intramuscular dose of cAd3-Marburg vaccine at either 1 × 1010 pu (n=20) or 1 × 1011 pu (n=20). The cAd3-Marburg vaccine was safe, well tolerated, and immunogenic. All enrolled participants received cAd3-Marburg vaccine, with 37 (93%) participants completing follow-up visits; two (5%) participants moved from the area and one (3%) was lost to follow-up. No serious adverse events related to vaccination occurred. Mild to moderate reactogenicity was observed after vaccination, with symptoms of injection site pain and tenderness (27 [68%] of 40 participants), malaise (18 [45%] of 40 participants), headache (17 [43%] of 40 participants), and myalgia (14 [35%] of 40 participants) most commonly reported. Glycoprotein-specific antibodies were induced in 38 (95%) of 40 participants 4 weeks after vaccination, with geometric mean titres of 421 [95% CI 209-846] in the 1 × 1010 pu group and 545 [276-1078] in the 1 × 1011 pu group, and remained significantly elevated at 48 weeks compared with baseline titres (39 [95% CI 13-119] in the 1 ×1010 pu group and 27 [95-156] in the 1 ×1011 pu group; both p<0·0001). T-cell responses to the glycoprotein insert and neutralising responses against the cAd3 vector were also increased at 4 weeks after vaccination. INTERPRETATION: This first-in-human trial of this cAd3-Marburg vaccine showed the agent is safe and immunogenic, with a safety profile similar to previously tested cAd3-vectored filovirus vaccines. 95% of participants produced a glycoprotein-specific antibody response at 4 weeks after a single vaccination, which remained in 70% of participants at 48 weeks. These findings represent a crucial step in the development of a vaccine for emergency deployment against a re-emerging pathogen that has recently expanded its reach to new regions. FUNDING: National Institutes of Health.

Development and evaluation of a tool to optimise inhaler selection prior to hospital discharge following an exacerbation of COPD.

Introduction: Rates of mortality and re-admission after a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD are high and resistant to change. COPD guidelines do not give practical advice about the optimal selection of inhaled drugs and device in this situation. We hypothesised that a failure to optimise inhaled drug and drug delivery prior to discharge from hospital after an exacerbation would be associated with a modifiable increased risk of re-admission and death. We designed a study to 1) develop a practical inhaler selection tool to use at the point of hospital discharge and 2) implement this tool to understand the potential impact on modifying inhaler prescriptions, clinical outcomes, acceptability to clinicians and patients, and the feasibility of delivering a definitive trial to demonstrate potential benefit. Methods: We iteratively developed an inhaler selection tool for use prior to discharge following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD using surveys with multiprofessional clinicians and a focus group of people living with COPD. We surveyed clinicians to understand their views on the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for death and re-admission following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD. We conducted a mixed-methods implementation feasibility study using the tool at discharge, and collated 30- and 90-day follow-up data including death and re-admissions. Additionally, we observed the tool being used and interviewed clinicians and patients about use of the tool in this setting. Results: We completed the design of an inhaler selection tool through two rounds of consultations with 94 multiprofessional clinicians, and a focus group of four expert patients. Regarding MCIDs, there was majority consensus for the following reductions from baseline being the MCID: 30-day readmissions 5-10%, 90-day readmissions 10-20%, 30-day mortality 5-10% and 90-day mortality 5-10%. 118 patients were assessed for eligibility and 26 had the tool applied. A change in inhaled medication was recommended in nine (35%) out of 26. Re-admission or death at 30 days was seen in 33% of the switch group and 35% of the no-switch group. Re-admission or death at 90 days was seen in 56% of the switch group and 41% of the no-switch group. Satisfaction with inhalers was generally high, and switching was associated with a small increase in the Feeling of Satisfaction with Inhaler questionnaire of 3 out of 50 points. Delivery of a definitive study would be challenging. Conclusion: We completed a mixed-methods study to design and implement a tool to aid optimisation of inhaled pharmacotherapy prior to discharge following a hospitalised exacerbation of COPD. This was not associated with fewer re-admissions, but was well received and one-third of people were eligible for a change in inhalers.

Telephone-based assessments to minimize missing data in longitudinal depression trials: a project IMPACTS study report.

PURPOSE: Missing data in clinical efficacy and effectiveness trials continue to be a major threat to the validity of study findings. The purpose of this report is to describe methods developed to ensure completion of outcome assessments with public mental health sector subjects participating in a longitudinal, repeated measures study for the treatment of major depressive disorder. We developed longitudinal assessment procedures that included telephone-based clinician interviews in order to minimize missing data commonly encountered with face-to-face assessment procedures. METHODS: A pre-planned, multi-step strategy was developed to ensure completeness of data collection. The procedure included obtaining multiple pieces of patient contact information at baseline, careful education of both staff and patients concerning the purpose of assessments, establishing good patient rapport, and finally being flexible and persistent with phone appointments to ensure the completion of telephone-based follow-up assessments. A well-developed administrative and organizational structure was also put in place prior to study implementation. RESULTS: The assessment completion rate for the primary outcome for 310 of 504 subjects who enrolled and completed 52 weeks (at the time of manuscript) of telephone-based follow-up assessments was 96.8%. CONCLUSION: By utilizing telephone-based follow-up procedures and adapting our easy-to-use pre-defined multi-step approach, researchers can maximize patient data retention in longitudinal studies.