The Lancet Infectious Diseases
Jan 2016 Volume 16 Number 1 p1-130 e1-e9
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/laninf/issue/current
.
Editorial
Measles immunisation: time to close the gap
The Lancet Infectious Diseases
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00504-6
Summary
Since the beginning of the century, the number of measles-related deaths has fallen substantially; between 2000 and 2014 mass immunisation efforts prevented an estimated 17·1 million deaths worldwide, and the number of cases decreased from 146 to 40 per million. Unfortunately, after this decrease the situation has stagnated and many countries are falling far behind the 2015 elimination targets according to a report by WHO and the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released in November, 2015.
.
Comment
Duration of immune responses after Ebola virus vaccination
Open Access
Steven B Bradfute
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1473-3099(15)00408-9
Summary
In The Lancet Infectious Diseases, Milagritos Tapia and colleagues1 address two important facets of Ebola virus immunity: longevity of vaccine-induced immune responses and correlates of immunity. Early attempts at Ebola virus vaccines on the basis of traditional methods, such as inactivated preparations and subunit vaccines, were not effective in animal studies2 (although later publications on these platforms are more promising3). Subsequent studies used a wide diversity of vaccine platforms that had not been used in approved human vaccines, such as non-pathogenic viral vectors engineered to express Ebola virus surface glycoprotein.
Articles
Use of ChAd3-EBO-Z Ebola virus vaccine in Malian and US adults, and boosting of Malian adults with MVA-BN-Filo: a phase 1, single-blind, randomised trial, a phase 1b, open-label and double-blind, dose-escalation trial, and a nested, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
Milagritos D Tapia, Samba O Sow, Kirsten E Lyke, Fadima Cheick Haidara, Fatoumata Diallo, Moussa Doumbia, Awa Traore, Flanon Coulibaly, Mamoudou Kodio, Uma Onwuchekwa, Marcelo B Sztein, Rezwanul Wahid, James D Campbell, Marie-Paule Kieny, Vasee Moorthy, Egeruan B Imoukhuede, Tommy Rampling, Francois Roman, Iris De Ryck, Abbie R Bellamy, Len Dally, Olivier Tshiani Mbaya, Aurélie Ploquin, Yan Zhou, Daphne A Stanley, Robert Bailer, Richard A Koup, Mario Roederer, Julie Ledgerwood, Adrian V S Hill, W Ripley Ballou, Nancy Sullivan, Barney Graham, Myron M Levine
Open Access
Summary
Background
The 2014 west African Zaire Ebola virus epidemic prompted worldwide partners to accelerate clinical development of replication-defective chimpanzee adenovirus 3 vector vaccine expressing Zaire Ebola virus glycoprotein (ChAd3-EBO-Z). We aimed to investigate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of ChAd3-EBO-Z in Malian and US adults, and assess the effect of boosting of Malians with modified vaccinia Ankara expressing Zaire Ebola virus glycoprotein and other filovirus antigens (MVA-BN-Filo).
Methods
In the phase 1, single-blind, randomised trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in the USA, we recruited adults aged 18–65 years from the University of Maryland medical community and the Baltimore community. In the phase 1b, open-label and double-blind, dose-escalation trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in Mali, we recruited adults 18–50 years of age from six hospitals and health centres in Bamako (Mali), some of whom were also eligible for a nested, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of MVA-BN-Filo. For randomised segments of the Malian trial and for the US trial, we randomly allocated participants (1:1; block size of six [Malian] or four [US]; ARB produced computer-generated randomisation lists; clinical staff did randomisation) to different single doses of intramuscular immunisation with ChAd3-EBO-Z: Malians received 1 × 1010 viral particle units (pu), 2·5 × 1010 pu, 5 × 1010 pu, or 1 × 1011 pu; US participants received 1 × 1010 pu or 1 × 1011 pu. We randomly allocated Malians in the nested trial (1:1) to receive a single dose of 2 × 108 plaque-forming units of MVA-BN-Filo or saline placebo. In the double-blind segments of the Malian trial, investigators, clinical staff, participants, and immunology laboratory staff were masked, but the study pharmacist (MK), vaccine administrator, and study statistician (ARB) were unmasked. In the US trial, investigators were not masked, but participants were. Analyses were per protocol. The primary outcome was safety, measured with occurrence of adverse events for 7 days after vaccination. Both trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02231866 (US) and NCT02267109 (Malian).
Findings
Between Oct 8, 2014, and Feb 16, 2015, we randomly allocated 91 participants in Mali (ten [11%] to 1 × 1010 pu, 35 [38%] to 2·5 × 1010 pu, 35 [38%] to 5 × 1010 pu, and 11 [12%] to 1 × 1011 pu) and 20 in the USA (ten [50%] to 1 × 1010 pu and ten [50%] to 1 × 1011 pu), and boosted 52 Malians with MVA-BN-Filo (27 [52%]) or saline (25 [48%]). We identified no safety concerns with either vaccine: seven (8%) of 91 participants in Mali (five [5%] received 5 × 1010 and two [2%] received 1 × 1011 pu) and four (20%) of 20 in the USA (all received 1 × 1011 pu) given ChAd3-EBO-Z had fever lasting for less than 24 h, and 15 (56%) of 27 Malians boosted with MVA-BN-Filo had injection-site pain or tenderness.
Interpretation
1 × 1011 pu single-dose ChAd3-EBO-Z could suffice for phase 3 efficacy trials of ring-vaccination containment needing short-term, high-level protection to interrupt transmission. MVA-BN-Filo boosting, although a complex regimen, could confer long-lived protection if needed (eg, for health-care workers).
Funding
Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council UK, Department for International Development UK, National Cancer Institute, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Federal Funds from National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
.
Personal View
The scenario approach for countries considering the addition of oral cholera vaccination in cholera preparedness and control plans
Jacqueline Deen, Lorenz von Seidlein, Francisco J Luquero, Christopher Troeger, Rita Reyburn, Anna Lena Lopez, Amanda Debes, David A Sack
Summary
Oral cholera vaccination could be deployed in a diverse range of situations from cholera-endemic areas and locations of humanitarian crises, but no clear consensus exists. The supply of licensed, WHO-prequalified cholera vaccines is not sufficient to meet endemic and epidemic needs worldwide and so prioritisation is needed. We have developed a scenario approach to systematically classify situations in which oral cholera vaccination might be useful. Our scenario approach distinguishes between five types of cholera epidemiology based on experiences from around the world and provides evidence that we hope will spur the development of detailed guidelines on how and where oral cholera vaccines could, and should, be most rationally deployed.
.
The Ebola Vaccine Team B: a model for promoting the rapid development of medical countermeasures for emerging infectious disease threats
Michael Osterholm, Kristine Moore, Julie Ostrowsky, Kathleen Kimball-Baker, Jeremy Farrar, Wellcome Trust-CIDRAP Ebola Vaccine Team B
Summary
In support of accelerated development of Ebola vaccines from preclinical research to clinical trials, in November, 2014, the Wellcome Trust and the Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy (CIDRAP) at the University of Minnesota established the Wellcome Trust-CIDRAP Ebola Vaccine Team B initiative. This ongoing initiative includes experts with global experience in various phases of bringing new vaccines to market, such as funding, research and development, manufacturing, determination of safety and efficacy, regulatory approval, and vaccination delivery. It also includes experts in community engagement strategies and ethical issues germane to vaccination policies, including eight African scientists with direct experience in developing and implementing vaccination policies in Africa. Ebola Vaccine Team B members have worked on a range of vaccination programmes, such as polio eradication (Africa and globally), development of meningococcal A disease vaccination campaigns in Africa, and malaria and HIV/AIDS vaccine research. We also provide perspective on how this experience can inform future situations where urgent development of vaccines is needed, and we comment on the role that an independent, expert group such as Team B can have in support of national and international public health authorities toward addressing a public health crisis.