Twenty-five years of the WHO vaccines prequalification programme (1987-2012): lessons learned and future perspectives

Vaccine value profile for norovirus

Norovirus is attributed to nearly 1 out of every 5 episodes of diarrheal disease globally and is estimated to cause approximately 200,000 deaths annually worldwide, with 70,000 or more among children in developing countries. Noroviruses remain a leading cause of sporadic disease and outbreaks of acute gastroenteritis even in industrialized settings, highlighting that improved hygiene and sanitation alone may not be fully effective in controlling norovirus. Strengths in global progress towards a Norovirus vaccine include a diverse though not deep pipeline which includes multiple approaches, including some with proven technology platforms (e.g., VLP-based HPV vaccines). However, several gaps in knowledge persist, including a fulsome mechanistic understanding of how the virus attaches to human host cells, internalizes, and induces disease.

Assessment of the COVID-19 vaccine market landscape in 2021 relative to challenges in low- and middle-income countries

To evaluate the early vaccine landscape relative to challenges faced by low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), we conducted a cross-sectional study of all COVID-19 vaccines in clinical trials in 2021 (n = 123) using a structured 13-point analytic framework. Supply sustainability was defined as a composite metric of four manufacturing and regulation variables. Vaccine desirability was defined as a composite metric of nine development and distribution variables. Ten vaccines in phases 2/3, 3, or 4 and five vaccines in phases 1 and 1/2 had a sustainability score equal to or above 0.5. Ten vaccines in phases 2/3, 3, or 4 and seven vaccines in phases 1 and 1/2 had a desirability score equal to or above 0.5. No vaccines in Phases 2/3, 3, or 4 met more than one distribution criterion. Structured assessment COVID-19 vaccine candidates in clinical trials in 2021 revealed numerous challenges to adequate access in LMICs. Key policy recommendations included increasing technology transfer to LMICs, developing international legal mechanisms to prevent export bans, and increasing investment in vaccine candidates with more favorable distribution profiles.

Delay in Vaccine Access in ASEAN Countries

Background: The introduction of new vaccines has been delayed in some countries in the Asia-Pacific region, which has led to delays in accessing vaccines for target patients. However, the approval lag of vaccines in the Asia-Pacific region has not been assessed. The objective of this study is to assess the availability and approval lag of vaccines in Asia-Pacific countries and compare them among Asia-Pacific countries, the United States (US), and Europe (EU). Methods: The information on vaccines prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) between 2010 and 2019 was obtained primarily from the WHO website. The date of approval of the WHO prequalified vaccine in Australia, India, South Korea, Thailand, Singapore, Malaysia, the US, and EU was retrieved from the official website of national regulatory agencies. The vaccines were divided into two groups based on their first approval pathway, that is, vaccines that were first approved by SRA (Stringent Regulatory Authority including the US, EU, and WHO) and those that were first approved by non-SRA. The absolute approval lag represented the availability of the vaccine. Relative approval lag represented the lag time between the approval date of the country of interest and the first global approval date and was measured as the median approval lag. A Mann−Whitney U test was used to examine statistical differences between relative approval lag between the SRA first and the non-SRA first groups. Results: A total of 92 vaccines were prequalified by the WHO between 2010 and 2019, but only 61 vaccines were included in the analysis. Over 50% of vaccines were first licensed by non-SRAs. Of all the WHO-prequalified vaccines, the median approval lag in the ASEAN countries in this study was longer than those in the US and EU, with a median of 30 months in Australia, 15 months in South Korea, 52 months in Thailand, and 23 months in Singapore, compared to 0 months in the US and EU. The differences in approval lags between SRA first vaccines and non-SRA first vaccines were statistically significant in South Korea and Thailand (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The approval lag of vaccines was observed in the Asia-Pacific region, indicating a gap between the Asia-pacific region and the US and EU in regard to access to new vaccines. Future studies need to analyze the background factors related to the gap in availability and vaccine approval lag in the Asia-Pacific region and assess the impact of vaccine approval lag in the region.

The impact of the private sector co-payment mechanism (PSCM) on the private market for ACT in Nigeria: results of the 2018 cross-sectional outlet and household market surveys

Background

The private sector plays a large role in malaria treatment provision in Nigeria. To improve access to, and affordability of, quality-assured artemisinin-based combination therapy (QA-ACT) within this sector, the Affordable Medicines Facility-Malaria began operations in 2010 and transitioned to a private sector co-payment mechanism (PSCM) until 2017. To assess the impact of the scheme on the ACT market, cross-sectional household and outlet surveys were conducted in 2018 to coincide with the final stockages of ACT medicines procured under the PSCM.

Methods

An outlet survey was conducted targeting private pharmacies and Proprietary and Patent Medicine Vendors (PPMVs) across different regions of Nigeria to assess supply-side market factors related to availability and cost of anti-malarials, including artemisinin-based combinations subsidised under the PSCM (called green leaf ACT on account of their green leaf logo) and those not subsidised (non-green leaf ACT). A concurrent household survey was conducted to determine demand-side factors related to treatment-seeking practices, ACT brand preference and purchase decision. Data were compared with previous ACTWatch surveys to consider change over time.

Results

Availability of artemisinin-based combinations increased significantly over the PSCM period and was almost universal by the time of the 2018 market survey. This increase was seen particularly among PPMVs. While the cost of green leaf ACT remained relatively stable over time, the cost of non-green leaf ACT reduced significantly so that by 2018 they had equivalent affordability. Unsubsidised brands were also available in different formulations and dosages, with double-strength artemisinin-based combination reported as the most frequently purchased dosage type, and child artemisinin-based combinations popular in suspension and dispersible forms (forms not subsidised by the PSCM).

Conclusions

The PSCM had a clear impact on increasing not only the reach of subsidized QA brands, but also of non-subsidised brands. Increased market competition led to innovation from unsubsidised brands and large reductions in costs to make them competitive with subsidised brands. Concerns are drawn from the large market share that non-QA brands have managed to gain as well as the continued market share of oral artemisinin monotherapies. Continued monitoring of the market is recommended, along with improved local capacity for QA-certification and monitoring.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12936-021-04039-9.

Review of Oral Rabies Vaccination of Dogs and Its Application in India

Oral rabies vaccines (ORVs) have been in use to successfully control rabies in wildlife since 1978 across Europe and the USA. This review focuses on the potential and need for the use of ORVs in free-roaming dogs to control dog-transmitted rabies in India. Iterative work to improve ORVs over the past four decades has resulted in vaccines that have high safety profiles whilst generating a consistent protective immune response to the rabies virus. The available evidence for safety and efficacy of modern ORVs in dogs and the broad and outspoken support from prominent global public health institutions for their use provides confidence to national authorities considering their use in rabies-endemic regions. India is estimated to have the largest rabies burden of any country and, whilst considerable progress has been made to increase access to human rabies prophylaxis, examples of high-output mass dog vaccination campaigns to eliminate the virus at the source remain limited. Efficiently accessing a large proportion of the dog population through parenteral methods is a considerable challenge due to the large, evasive stray dog population in many settings. Existing parenteral approaches require large skilled dog-catching teams to reach these dogs, which present financial, operational and logistical limitations to achieve 70% dog vaccination coverage in urban settings in a short duration. ORV presents the potential to accelerate the development of approaches to eliminate rabies across large areas of the South Asia region. Here we review the use of ORVs in wildlife and dogs, with specific consideration of the India setting. We also present the results of a risk analysis for a hypothetical campaign using ORV for the vaccination of dogs in an Indian state.

Vaccine Procurement: A Conceptual Framework Based on Literature Review

Ensuring timely access to affordable vaccines has been acknowledged as a global public health priority, as also recently testified by the debate sparked during the COVID-19 pandemic. Effective vaccine procurement strategies are essential to reach this goal. Nevertheless, this is still a neglected research topic. A narrative literature review on vaccine procurement was conducted, by retrieving articles from four academic databases (PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, WebOfScience), 'grey' literature reports, and institutional websites. The aim was to clarify key concepts and definitions relating to vaccine procurement, describe main vaccine procurement methods, and identify knowledge gaps and future perspectives. A theoretical conceptual framework was developed of the key factors involved in vaccine procurement, which include quality and safety of the product, forecasting and budgeting, procurement legislation, financial sustainability, and plurality of manufacture, contracting, investment in training, storage and service delivery, monitoring and evaluation. This information can be useful to support policymakers during planning, implementation, and evaluation of regional and national vaccine procurement strategies and policies.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus is a common cause of diarrhoea, diarrhoea-related hospital admissions, and diarrhoea-related deaths worldwide. Rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include Rotarix (GlaxoSmithKline), RotaTeq (Merck), and, more recently, Rotasiil (Serum Institute of India Ltd.), and Rotavac (Bharat Biotech Ltd.).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 30 November 2020, we searched PubMed, the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, Science Citation Index Expanded, Social Sciences Citation Index, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science, Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science & Humanities. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies, and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted in children that compared rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO with either placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risk of bias. One author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analyses by under-five country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 228,233 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed Rotarix, 15 trials RotaTeq (88,934 participants), five trials Rotasiil (11,753 participants), and four trials Rotavac (8432 participants). Rotarix Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 93% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (14,976 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 52% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (3874 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (31,671 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 36% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (26,479 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 58% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (15,882 participants, 4 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 90% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (18,145 participants, 6 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 51% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (6269 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).   In medium-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 77% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (28,834 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 26% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (23,317 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, Rotarix prevented 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (13,768 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (2764 participants, 1 trial; high-certainty evidence). RotaTeq Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 97% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6775 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).  Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 96% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (5442 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  In medium-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 79% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (3863 participants, 1 trial; low-certainty evidence).  In high-mortality countries, RotaTeq prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6744 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).  We did not identify RotaTeq studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low- or medium-mortality countries. Rotasiil Rotasiil has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality. Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 48% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotasiil prevented 44% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and resulted in little to no difference in severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (11,008 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Rotavac Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low or medium child mortality.  Infants vaccinated and followed up for the first year of life In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In high-mortality countries, Rotavac prevented 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence); no Rotavac studies have reported on severe all-cause diarrhoea at two-years follow-up. Safety No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAEs) was detected with Rotarix (103,714 participants, 31 trials; high-certainty evidence), RotaTeq (82,502 participants, 14 trials; moderate to high-certainty evidence), Rotasiil (11,646 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), or Rotavac (8210 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). Deaths were infrequent and the analysis had insufficient evidence to show an effect on all-cause mortality. Intussusception was rare.  AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Rotarix, RotaTeq, Rotasiil, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. The relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, but more episodes are prevented in high-mortality settings as the baseline risk is higher. In high-mortality countries some results suggest lower efficacy in the second year. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events, including intussusception, from any of the prequalified rotavirus vaccines.

Role of Oral Rabies Vaccines in the Elimination of Dog-Mediated Human Rabies Deaths

Domestic dogs are responsible for nearly all the »59,000 global human rabies deaths that occur annually. Numerous control measures have been successful at eliminating dog-mediated human rabies deaths in upper-income countries, including dog population management, parenteral dog vaccination programs, access to human rabies vaccines, and education programs for bite prevention and wound treatment. Implementing these techniques in resource-poor settings can be challenging; perhaps the greatest challenge is maintaining adequate herd immunity in free-roaming dog populations. Oral rabies vaccines have been a cornerstone in rabies virus elimination from wildlife populations; however, oral vaccines have never been effectively used to control dog-mediated rabies. Here, we convey the perspectives of the World Organisation for Animal Health Rabies Reference Laboratory Directors, the World Organisation for Animal Health expert committee on dog rabies control, and World Health Organization regarding the role of oral vaccines for dogs. We also issue recommendations for overcoming hesitations to expedited field use of appropriate oral vaccines.

SARS-CoV-2 infection: a global outbreak and its implication on public health

BACKGROUND

A novel corona virus is formally named as severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), which results in causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). It is the latest prevalent pandemic worldwide when compared to other infectious diseases like Avian flu, Middle East respiratory syndrome and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).

MAIN BODY

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is currently occurring pandemic over world. It was emerged in Wuhan, China, in the end of December 2019 and spreading across worldwide. As the coronavirus is spreading easily through direct contact with infected people droplets, inhalation, and also air droplets, it hit up a huge amount of population even reported with death. Still, with small amounts of asymptomatic transmission between people it spreads throughout the globe. People need special care to protect from the transmission of disease. However, there are no drugs so far that shows efficacy; there is an immediate need for the development of vaccines. In order to decrease the COVID-19 cases, organizations rapidly involve in the preparation of vaccine and many vaccines have been developed by various countries. The governments took safety measures to control the spread of virus and also to minimize morbidity and mortality rate to least possible.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this review article is to increase our understanding of COVID-19 and facilitate the people to take a move in facing challenges of the world.

Typhoid fever infection - Antibiotic resistance and vaccination strategies: A narrative review

Typhoid fever is a bacterial infection caused by the Gram-negative bacterium Salmonella enterica subspecies enterica serovar Typhi (S. Typhi), prevalent in many low- and middle-income countries. In high-income territories, typhoid fever is predominantly travel-related, consequent to travel in typhoid-endemic regions; however, data show that the level of typhoid vaccination in travellers is low. Successful management of typhoid fever using antibiotics is becoming increasingly difficult due to drug resistance; emerging resistance has spread geographically due to factors such as increasing travel connectivity, affecting those in endemic regions and travellers alike. This review provides an overview of: the epidemiology and diagnosis of typhoid fever; the emergence of drug-resistant typhoid strains in the endemic setting; drug resistance observed in travellers; vaccines currently available to prevent typhoid fever; vaccine recommendations for people living in typhoid-endemic regions; strategies for the introduction of typhoid vaccines and stakeholders in vaccination programmes; and travel recommendations for a selection of destinations with a medium or high incidence of typhoid fever.

Next-generation rotavirus vaccine developers meeting: Summary of a meeting sponsored by PATH and the bill & melinda gates foundation (19-20 June 2019, Geneva)

Despite the contribution of currently licensed live, oral rotavirus vaccines (LORVs) to alleviating the burden of severe disease and death from rotavirus gastroenteritis, those vaccines have proven less efficacious in resource-limited settings than in high- and middle-income countries. It has been proposed that the residual burden of rotavirus disease might be overcome with parenterally administered vaccines, or next-generation rotavirus vaccines (NGRV). To better define the progress of development of these vaccines, a meeting of vaccine developers and manufacturers engaged in NGRV research and development was convened in Geneva in June 2019. Several NRGVs are in various stages of preclinical development, and two have already entered clinical testing. The vaccine platforms include subunit protein, inactivated whole virus, virus-like particle and RNA-based vaccines. Meeting participants included groups involved in NGRV development, scientists investigating correlates of protection of rotavirus vaccines, and representatives of international organizations with insight into considerations for vaccine introduction. This report summarizes the presentations shared at the meeting.

The World Health Organization Global Benchmarking Tool an Instrument to Strengthen Medical Products Regulation and Promote Universal Health Coverage

National regulatory authorities (NRAs) are the gatekeepers of the supply chain of medical products, and they have a mandate to ensure the quality, safety and efficacy of medicines, vaccines, blood, and blood products, medical devices, including diagnostics and traditional, or herbal medicines. However, the majority of the world's regulators are still struggling to reach a level of maturity, whereby they have a stable, well-functioning and integrated regulatory system. The World Health Organization (WHO) has developed a Global Benchmarking Tool (GBT) as part of its five-step capacity building program to assist NRAs, using the tool, they can benchmark their own strengths and areas of weakness, and then engage in a formal benchmarking process together with WHO and international experts in order to formulate an effective and workable institutional development plan. The GBT is comprehensive across the entire product life cycle and allows benchmarking to be customized to the needs of the NRA. It has evolved from decades of experience using a variety of benchmarking tools, within WHO and other stakeholder organizations. By the end of December 2019, 26 countries had undergone formal benchmarking, and a further 54 countries had used the GBT to conduct self-benchmarking exercises assisted by WHO.

Emerging vaccine manufacturers are innovating for the next decade

The Developing Countries Vaccine Manufacturers Network (DCVMN) is a public health-driven alliance consisting of 43 vaccine manufacturers from 14 countries and territories, operating under the mandate to protect all people against known and emerging infectious diseases, by improving the availability of high-quality vaccines globally. The Network provides a platform for organizations to come together regularly to share technical information, best practices and future prospects. DCVMN members are playing an increasingly important role in public health supplying over 50% of the doses of vaccines procured by UNICEF globally. To evaluate the progress made by Network's members, a survey consisting of 9 questions covering three important components of the manufacturers in the network was created, focusing on company dedicated human resources, vaccine production, and research and development efforts. Results show that more vaccines from more manufacturers are achieving WHO Pre-qualification, with areas of focus including the contributions to a Polio-free world, ending cholera, and tackling re-emerging diseases, such as measles. An increase by 50% of number of manufacturing companies holding WHO prequalified vaccines was observed from 2013 to 2019, strengthening open competitiveness for global vaccines supply. Notably, Network members have 181 vaccine projects in the research and development pipeline, highlighting novel vaccines against mosquito-borne diseases, such as dengue, chikungunya and Zika, novel human papillomavirus and pneumococcal conjugated vaccines. This report summarizes the progressive efforts of DCVMN members to contribute to reducing the burden of infectious diseases globally and details their commitment to vaccine innovation, particularly in the past five years, in the context of how vaccine innovations of today will shape the fight against infectious diseases tomorrow.

Progress in microneedle array patch (MAP) for vaccine delivery

A microneedle array patch (MAP) has been developed as a new delivery system for vaccines. Preclinical and clinical trials with a vaccine MAP showed improved stability, safety, and immunological efficacy compared to conventional vaccine administration. Various vaccines can be delivered with a MAP. Currently, microneedle manufacturers can mass-produce pharmaceutical MAP and cosmetic MAP and this mass-production system can be adapted to produce a vaccine MAP. Clinical trials with a vaccine MAP have shown comparable efficacy with conventional administration, and discussions about regulations for a vaccine MAP are underway. However, there are concerns of reasonable cost, mass production, efficacy, and safety standards that meet FDA approval, as well as the need for feedback regarding the best method of administration. Currently, microneedles have been studied for the delivery of many kinds of vaccines, and preclinical and clinical studies of vaccine microneedles are in progress. For the foreseeable future, some vaccines will continue to be administered with syringes and needles while the use of a vaccine MAP continues to be improved because of the advantages of less pain, self-administration, improved stability, convenience, and safety.

Global oral cholera vaccine use, 2013-2018

Vaccination is a key intervention to prevent and control cholera in conjunction with water, sanitation and hygiene activities. An oral cholera vaccine (OCV) stockpile was established by the World Health Organization (WHO) in 2013. We reviewed its use from July 2013 to all of 2018 in order to assess its role in cholera control. We computed information related to OCV deployments and campaigns conducted including setting, target population, timelines, delivery strategy, reported adverse events, coverage achieved, and costs. In 2013-2018, a total of 83,509,941 OCV doses have been requested by 24 countries, of which 55,409,160 were approved and 36,066,010 eventually shipped in 83 deployments, resulting in 104 vaccination campaigns in 22 countries. OCVs had in general high uptake (mean administrative coverage 1st dose campaign at 90.3%; 2nd dose campaign at 88.2%; mean survey-estimated two-dose coverage at 69.9%, at least one dose at 84.6%) No serious adverse events were reported. Campaigns were organized quickly (five days median duration). In emergency settings, the longest delay was from the occurrence of the emergency to requesting OCV (median: 26 days). The mean cost of administering one dose of vaccine was 2.98 USD. The OCV stockpile is an important public health resource. OCVs were generally well accepted by the population and their use demonstrated to be safe and feasible in all settings. OCV was an inexpensive intervention, although timing was a limiting factor for emergency use. The dynamic created by the establishment of the OCV stockpile has played a role in the increased use of the vaccine by setting in motion a virtuous cycle by which better monitoring and evaluation leads to better campaign organization, better cholera control, and more requests being generated. Further work is needed to improve timeliness of response and contextualize strategies for OCV delivery in the various settings.

WHO consultation on group B Streptococcus vaccine development: Report from a meeting held on 27-28 April 2016

Globally, group B Streptococcus (GBS) remains a leading cause of sepsis and meningitis in infants in the first 90days of life. Intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis (IAP) for women at increased risk of transmitting GBS to their newborns has been effective in reducing part, but not all, of the GBS disease burden in many high income countries (HICs). In low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), IAP use is low. Immunization of pregnant women with a GBS vaccine represents an alternative strategy to protecting newborns and young infants, through transplacental antibody transfer and potentially by reducing new vaginal colonization. This vaccination strategy was first suggested in the 1970s and several potential GBS vaccines have completed phase I/II clinical trials. During the 2015 WHO Product Development for Vaccines Advisory Committee meeting, GBS was identified as a high priority for the development of a vaccine for maternal immunization because of the major public health burden posed by GBS in LMICs, and the high technical feasibility for successful development. Following this meeting, the first WHO technical consultation on GBS vaccines was held on the 27th and 28th of April 2016, to consider development pathways for such vaccines, focused on their potential role in reducing newborn and young infant deaths and possibly stillbirths in LMICs. Discussion topics included: (1) pathophysiology of disease; (2) current gaps in the knowledge of global disease burden and serotype distribution; (3) vaccine candidates under development; (4) design considerations for phase III trials; and (5) pathways to licensure, policy recommendations and use. Efforts to address gaps identified in each of these areas are needed to establish the public health need for, the development and deployment of, efficacious GBS vaccines. In particular, more work is required to understand the global disease burden of GBS-associated stillbirths, and to develop quality-assured standardized antibody assays to identify correlates of protection.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac. RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence). RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Children vaccinated and followed up for two years In low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence). Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up. Children vaccinated and followed up for two years Rotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence). No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence). There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events. 21 October 2019 Up to date All studies incorporated from most recent search All published trials found in the last search (4 Apr, 2018) were included and 15 ongoing studies are currently awaiting completion (see 'Characteristics of ongoing studies').

Potential use of microarray patches for vaccine delivery in low- and middle- income countries

Microarray patches (MAPs), also referred to as microneedle patches, are a novel methodology that have the potential to overcome barriers to vaccine delivery in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), and transform the way that vaccines are delivered within immunization programs. The World Health Organization's Initiative for Vaccine Research and its partners are working to understand how MAPs could ease vaccine delivery and increase equitable access to vaccines in LMICs. Global stakeholders have been engaged to evaluate technical, economic, and programmatic challenges; to validate assumptions where possible; and to propose areas of focus to facilitate future vaccine-MAP product development. This report summarizes those learnings.

Highly affordable vaccines are critical for our continued efforts to reduce global childhood mortality

Infectious diseases remain a major health threat, not only in resource-poor countries but also in pockets of poverty within middle-income and sometimes high-income countries. Whilst strong research and development for novel vaccines are urgently needed, equal care needs to be taken that current vaccines are produced at affordable prices so that universal childhood immunization will be accomplished. The Serum Institute of India (SII) has become the largest producer of affordable vaccines. Provision of SII produced vaccines against measles, rubella and meningitis to 73 GAVI supported countries alone will avert more than 5 million deaths between 2001 and 2020. Similarly, the SII produced measles vaccine, supplied to UNICEF and PAHO, can be attributed to nearly 22 million averted deaths between 1990 and 2016. Data presented provide compelling evidence for the crucial impact of partnerships between affordable vaccine producers and governmental, intergovernmental and nongovernmental organizations on universal vaccination to reduce childhood mortality.

Vaccines for preventing rotavirus diarrhoea: vaccines in use

BACKGROUND

Rotavirus results in more diarrhoea-related deaths in children under five years than any other single agent in countries with high childhood mortality. It is also a common cause of diarrhoea-related hospital admissions in countries with low childhood mortality. Rotavirus vaccines that have been prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) include a monovalent vaccine (RV1; Rotarix, GlaxoSmithKline), a pentavalent vaccine (RV5; RotaTeq, Merck), and, more recently, another monovalent vaccine (Rotavac, Bharat Biotech).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate rotavirus vaccines prequalified by the WHO (RV1, RV5, and Rotavac) for their efficacy and safety in children.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 April 2018 we searched MEDLINE (via PubMed), the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL (published in the Cochrane Library), Embase, LILACS, and BIOSIS. We also searched the WHO ICTRP, ClinicalTrials.gov, clinical trial reports from manufacturers' websites, and reference lists of included studies and relevant systematic reviews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in children comparing rotavirus vaccines prequalified for use by the WHO versus placebo or no intervention.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and assessed risks of bias. One review author extracted data and a second author cross-checked them. We combined dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We stratified the analysis by country mortality rate and used GRADE to evaluate evidence certainty.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five trials met the inclusion criteria and enrolled a total of 216,480 participants. Thirty-six trials (119,114 participants) assessed RV1, 15 trials (88,934 participants) RV5, and four trials (8432 participants) Rotavac.RV1 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 84% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.26; 43,779 participants, 7 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 41% of cases of severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.74; 28,051 participants, 3 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 63% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.60; 6114 participants, 3 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 27% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.95; 5639 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsIn low-mortality countries, RV1 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.23; 36,002 participants, 9 trials; high-certainty evidence), and probably prevents 37% of severe all-cause diarrhoea episodes (rate ratio 0.63, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.71; 39,091 participants, 2 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). In high-mortality countries RV1 probably prevents 35% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.83; 13,768 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 17% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.96; 2764 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.88 95% CI 0.83 to 0.93; high-certainty evidence). There were 30 cases of intussusception reported in 53,032 children after RV1 vaccination and 28 cases in 44,214 children after placebo or no intervention (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.46 to 1.05; low-certainty evidence).RV5 Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life In low-mortality countries, RV5 probably prevents 92% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.08, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.22; 4132 participants, 5 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.62; 5916 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), but there is probably little or no difference between vaccine and placebo for severe all-cause diarrhoea (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.11; 1 trial, 4085 participants; moderate-certainty evidence).Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsIn low-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 82% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.39; 7318 participants, 4 trials; moderate-certainty evidence). We did not identify studies reporting on severe all-cause diarrhoea in low-mortality countries. In high-mortality countries, RV5 prevents 41% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.82; 5885 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence), and 15% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.98; 5977 participants, 2 trials; high-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.86 to 1.01; moderate to high-certainty evidence). There were 16 cases of intussusception in 43,629 children after RV5 vaccination and 20 cases in 41,866 children after placebo (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.45; low-certainty evidence).Rotavac Children vaccinated and followed up the first year of life Rotavac has not been assessed in any RCT in countries with low child mortality. In India, a high-mortality country, Rotavac probably prevents 57% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases (RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.60; 6799 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); the trial did not report on severe all-cause diarrhoea at one-year follow-up.Children vaccinated and followed up for two yearsRotavac probably prevents 54% of severe rotavirus diarrhoea cases in India (RR 0.46, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.60; 6541 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence), and 16% of severe all-cause diarrhoea cases (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.98; 6799 participants, 1 trial; moderate-certainty evidence).No increased risk of serious adverse events (SAE) was detected (RR 0.93 95% CI 0.85 to 1.02; moderate-certainty evidence). There were eight cases of intussusception in 5764 children after Rotavac vaccination and three cases in 2818 children after placebo (RR 1.33, 95% CI 0.35 to 5.02; very low-certainty evidence).There was insufficient evidence of an effect on mortality from any rotavirus vaccine (198,381 participants, 44 trials; low- to very low-certainty evidence), as the trials were not powered to detect an effect at this endpoint.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

RV1, RV5, and Rotavac prevent episodes of rotavirus diarrhoea. Whilst the relative effect estimate is smaller in high-mortality than in low-mortality countries, there is a greater number of episodes prevented in these settings as the baseline risk is much higher. We found no increased risk of serious adverse events.

Regulatory Pathway for Licensing Biotherapeutics in Mexico

Biotherapeutic products which are derived from living organisms using recombinant DNA technology significantly contribute to the progress in the treatment of life-threatening and chronic diseases. The worldwide sale of biological drugs in 2016 was near US $263,700 million. In Latin America, where monoclonal antibodies market was worth US $7000 million, being Mexico the second largest market. Approval is one of the key aspects which influences the market of medicinal products, thus it is responsibility of the regulatory authority to establish a regulatory framework that ensure safety and efficacy of the products, and it is responsibility of the applicants to provide a high quality dossier in accordance with the registration requirements of the country. The applicants submitting registration requests in Mexico need to be aware of the requirements. Similar to many other countries, Mexico has adopted the Common Technical Document (CTD) structure for organizing dossier of the medicinal product for submission into main modules (i.e., quality, non-clinical, and clinical). This facilitates the submission process of medicinal products following a logical sequence aligned to the International Council on Harmonisation (ICH) guidelines. Moreover, this structure improves the transparency and clarity of the dossier in process of evaluation of medicinal products. In Mexico, the Ministry of Health has published a regulation, NOM-257-SSA1-2014, which established the general requirements to be followed by applicants to complete the registration of biotherapeutics. This regulation stipulates that the evaluation process is supported by a regulatory framework involving Good Manufacturing Practices, labeling, stability, clinical trials, biocomparability studies, pharmacovigilance, and a technical evaluation performed by a multidisciplinary team of experts in biotherapeutics development. Additionally, the Mexican regulatory agency, COFEPRIS, has published specific guidelines to facilitate the application process. Despite the availability of this information, the scope is limited to regulatory and administrative purposes, rather than technical-scientific supporting knowledge. The aim of this article is to provide concise information to improve and promote communication between industry and regulatory agencies. Herein, we describe the current process of COFEPRIS in regulating biotherapeutics in Mexico. This process explains the basis for the organization and structure of the technical-scientific information of biotherapeutics required for registration application.

Challenges for the registration of vaccines in emerging countries: Differences in dossier requirements, application and evaluation processes

The divergence of regulatory requirements and processes in developing and emerging countries contributes to hamper vaccines’ registration, and therefore delay access to high-quality, safe and efficacious vaccines for their respective populations. This report focuses on providing insights on the heterogeneity of registration requirements in terms of numbering structure and overall content of dossiers for marketing authorisation applications for vaccines in different areas of the world. While it also illustrates the divergence of regulatory processes in general, as well as the need to avoid redundant reviews, it does not claim to provide a comprehensive view of all processes nor existing facilitating mechanisms, nor is it intended to touch upon the differences in assessments made by different regulatory authorities. This report describes the work analysed by regulatory experts from vaccine manufacturing companies during a meeting held in Geneva in May 2017, in identifying and quantifying differences in the requirements for vaccine registration in three aspects for comparison: the dossier numbering structure and contents, the application forms, and the evaluation procedures, in different countries and regions. The Module 1 of the Common Technical Document (CTD) of 10 countries were compared. Modules 2–5 of the CTDs of two regions and three countries were compared to the CTD of the US FDA. The application forms of eight countries were compared and the registration procedures of 134 importing countries were compared as well. The analysis indicates a high degree of divergence in numbering structure and content requirements. Possible interventions that would lead to significant improvements in registration efficiency include alignment in CTD numbering structure, a standardised model-application form, and better convergence of evaluation procedures.

An updated methodology to review developing-country vaccine manufacturer viability

In 1997, Milstien, Batson, and Meaney published "A Systematic Method for Evaluating the Potential Viability of Local Vaccine Producers." The paper identified characteristics of successful vaccine manufacturers and developed a viability framework to evaluate their performance. This paper revisits the original study after two decades to determine the ability of the framework to predict manufacturer success. By reconstructing much of the original dataset and conducting in-depth interviews, the authors developed informed views on the continued viability of manufacturers in low- and middle-income country markets. Considering the marked changes in the market and technology landscape since 1997, the authors find the viability framework to be predictive and a useful lens through which to evaluate manufacturer success or failure. Of particular interest is how incumbent and potentially new developing-country vaccine manufacturers enter and sustain production in competitive international markets and how they integrate (or fail to integrate) new technology into the production process. Ultimately, most manufacturers will need to meet global quality standards to be viable. As governments and donors consider investments in vaccine producers, the updated viability factors will be a useful tool in evaluating the prospects of manufacturers over the mid to long term. The paper emphasizes that while up-front investments are important, other critical factors-including investments in a national regulatory authority, manufacturer independence, and ability to adapt and adopt new technology-are necessary to ensure viability.

Achievements and challenges for the use of killed oral cholera vaccines in the global stockpile era

Cholera remains an important but neglected public health threat, affecting the health of the poorest populations and imposing substantial costs on public health systems. Cholera can be eliminated where access to clean water, sanitation, and satisfactory hygiene practices are sustained, but major improvements in infrastructure continue to be a distant goal. New developments and trends of cholera disease burden, the creation of affordable oral cholera vaccines (OCVs) for use in developing countries, as well as recent evidence of vaccination impact has created an increased demand for cholera vaccines. The global OCV stockpile was established in 2013 and with support from Gavi, has assisted in achieving rapid access to vaccine in emergencies. Recent WHO prequalification of a second affordable OCV supports the stockpile goals of increased availability and distribution to affected populations. It serves as an essential step toward an integrated cholera control and prevention strategy in emergency and endemic settings.

Dengue vaccine: local decisions, global consequences

As new vaccines against diseases that are prevalent in low- and middle-income countries gradually become available, national health authorities are presented with new regulatory and policy challenges. The use of CYD-TDV – a chimeric tetravalent, live-attenuated dengue vaccine – was recently approved in five countries. Although promising for public health, this vaccine has only partial and heterogeneous efficacy and may have substantial adverse effects. In trials, children who were aged 2–5 years when first given CYD-TDV were seven times more likely to be hospitalized for dengue, in the third year post-vaccination, than their counterparts in the control group. As it has not been clarified whether this adverse effect is only a function of age or is determined by dengue serostatus, doubts have been cast over the long-term safety of this vaccine in seronegative individuals of any age. Any deployment of the vaccine, which should be very cautious and only considered after a rigorous evaluation of the vaccine’s risk–benefit ratio in explicit national and subnational scenarios, needs to be followed by a long-term assessment of the vaccine’s effects. Furthermore, any implementation of dengue vaccines must not weaken the political and financial support of preventive measures that can simultaneously limit the impacts of dengue and several other mosquito-borne pathogens.

Regulatory Pathways That Facilitated Timely Registration of a New Group A Meningococcal Conjugate Vaccine for Africa's Meningitis Belt Countries

BACKGROUND

Through its normative and public health leadership roles, the World Health Organization (WHO) plays a key role in the availability of vaccine products in low-and middle-income countries. The recent introduction of a new group A meningococcal conjugate vaccine, PsA-TT (MenAfriVac), in Africa exemplifies this process. WHO requires that any new vaccine to be introduced in countries for public health reasons and supplied through United Nations centralized mechanisms be licensed by the national regulatory agency (NRA) in the producing country, then prequalified and given a marketing authorization in the user countries.

METHODS

PsA-TT was manufactured by the Serum Institute of India, Ltd (SIIL), which submitted a license application in April 2009 to the Drug Controller General of India (DCGI), the Indian NRA responsible for licensing vaccines. WHO encouraged the DCGI to establish a collaboration with Health Canada's Centre for Vaccine Evaluation for the review. Through this collaborative effort, registration was facilitated and in December 2009 an export license was granted to SIIL, which subsequently submitted an application for WHO prequalification.

RESULTS

Given the importance of the vaccine, WHO "fast tracked" the prequalification review, and after a detailed review and site visit, WHO prequalification was granted to PsA-TT in June 2010. Country use of the new vaccine could not occur until the vaccine was a registered product in each country seeking its use. WHO facilitated country reviews by conducting regulatory training exercises (in French and English) for country NRA staff, which used the PsA-TT registration as a case study.

CONCLUSIONS

PsA-TT was gradually registered in African countries as vaccine introduction proceeded. The regulatory pathway for this new group A meningococcal conjugate vaccine proved to be a useful training opportunity both in India and Africa, because the availability of the vaccine was a high African public health priority, as well as for WHO as a case study to facilitate registration of vaccines based on reliance on other regulatory bodies.

A decade of adaptation: Regulatory contributions of the World Health Organization to the Global Action Plan for Influenza Vaccines (2006-2016)

The Global Action Plan (GAP) for Influenza Vaccines is a decade-long initiative that brings together a diverse range of stakeholders to work towards reducing anticipated global shortage of influenza vaccines and ensuring more equitable access to vaccines during the next influenza pandemic. Since its inception in 2006, significant progress has been made towards all the main objectives of GAP, namely: (1) an increase in seasonal vaccine use, (2) an increase in vaccine production, and (3) progress in research and development of more effective vaccines. The Technology Transfer Initiative (TTI), conceived and managed by WHO under the GAP, contributed to increasing regional influenza vaccine production capacity. This was achieved by facilitating technology transfer in 14 low- and middle-income countries, through grants to manufacturers to establish or strengthen influenza vaccine production capacity and support to their national regulatory authorities. Five of the countries subsequently licensed locally produced influenza vaccines; two pandemic and three seasonal vaccines received WHO prequalification. The success of GAP can be largely attributed to the regulatory support provided by WHO to both manufacturers and regulators. This support had two components: (1) direct regulatory support to GAP/TTI, and (2) support to GAP-related WHO programmes, such as the Pandemic Influenza Vaccine Deployment Initiative in 2010 and the Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework since 2013, especially in non-vaccine-producing countries. Temporary adaptation of the assessment process for influenza vaccines in the WHO Vaccine Prequalification Programme to the A(H1N1) pandemic situation in 2009 was instrumental to the success of the WHO Pandemic Influenza Vaccine Deployment Initiative in its attempt to meet the demand for pandemic vaccines in countries that received donated vaccines.

Contributions and challenges for worldwide vaccine safety: The Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety at 15 years

In 1999, the Global Advisory Committee on Vaccine Safety (GACVS) was established by the World Health Organization (WHO) to provide independent scientific advice on issues relating to the safety of vaccines and immunization. Fifteen years onward, we conducted a multi-faceted review to evaluate the impact, reach and challenges facing GACVS, including the role GACVS plays in informing global, regional and WHO member state vaccine policy. The methods included measures of organizational structure, citation impact, themes approached, and a discussion by previous and current members to evaluate past, present and future challenges. Given the increasing range of data sources and the deployment of many new vaccines, the Committee is facing the complex task of identifying the best available evidence for recommendations on vaccine safety. To help meet the increased demand for public transparency in decision making, GACVS-structured methodology for evidence-based decisions is evolving. GACVS also promotes best practices and capacity building for timely and accurate risk assessment; risk communications; outreach to help countries maintain and, if needed, rebuild public trust in vaccines; and advocacy for bridging the major gaps in vaccine safety capacity globally.

The development of global vaccine stockpiles

Global vaccine stockpiles, in which vaccines are reserved for use when needed for emergencies or supply shortages, have effectively provided countries with the capacity for rapid response to emergency situations, such as outbreaks of yellow fever and meningococcal meningitis. The high cost and insufficient supply of many vaccines, including oral cholera vaccine and pandemic influenza vaccine, have prompted discussion on expansion of the use of vaccine stockpiles to address a wider range of emerging and re-emerging diseases. However, the decision to establish and maintain a vaccine stockpile is complex and must take account of disease and vaccine characteristics, stockpile management, funding, and ethical concerns, such as equity. Past experience with global vaccine stockpiles provide valuable information about the processes for their establishment and maintenance. In this Review we explored existing literature and stockpile data to discuss the lessons learned and to inform the development of future vaccine stockpiles.