Seasonal malaria vaccination: protocol of a phase 3 trial of seasonal vaccination with the RTS,S/AS01E vaccine, seasonal malaria chemoprevention and the combination of vaccination and chemoprevention

The duration of protection against clinical malaria provided by the combination of seasonal RTS,S/AS01E vaccination and seasonal malaria chemoprevention versus either intervention given alone

BACKGROUND

A recent trial of 5920 children in Burkina Faso and Mali showed that the combination of seasonal vaccination with the RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine (primary series and two seasonal boosters) and seasonal malaria chemoprevention (four monthly cycles per year) was markedly more effective than either intervention given alone in preventing clinical malaria, severe malaria, and deaths from malaria.

METHODS

In order to help optimise the timing of these two interventions, trial data were reanalysed to estimate the duration of protection against clinical malaria provided by RTS,S/AS01E when deployed seasonally, by comparing the group who received the combination of SMC and RTS,S/AS01E with the group who received SMC alone. The duration of protection from SMC was also estimated comparing the combined intervention group with the group who received RTS,S/AS01E alone. Three methods were used: Piecewise Cox regression, Flexible parametric survival models and Smoothed Schoenfeld residuals from Cox models, stratifying on the study area and using robust standard errors to control for within-child clustering of multiple episodes.

RESULTS

The overall protective efficacy from RTS,S/AS01E over 6 months was at least 60% following the primary series and the two seasonal booster doses and remained at a high level over the full malaria transmission season. Beyond 6 months, protective efficacy appeared to wane more rapidly, but the uncertainty around the estimates increases due to the lower number of cases during this period (coinciding with the onset of the dry season). Protection from SMC exceeded 90% in the first 2-3 weeks post-administration after several cycles, but was not 100%, even immediately post-administration. Efficacy begins to decline from approximately day 21 and then declines more sharply after day 28, indicating the importance of preserving the delivery interval for SMC cycles at a maximum of four weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of both interventions was highest immediately post-administration. Understanding differences between these interventions in their peak efficacy and how rapidly efficacy declines over time will help to optimise the scheduling of SMC, malaria vaccination and the combination in areas of seasonal transmission with differing epidemiology, and using different vaccine delivery systems.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The RTS,S-SMC trial in which these data were collected was registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03143218.

Impact of seasonal RTS,S/AS01E vaccination plus seasonal malaria chemoprevention on the nutritional status of children in Burkina Faso and Mali

BACKGROUND

A recent trial in Burkina Faso and Mali showed that combining seasonal RTS,S/AS01_E malaria vaccination with seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) substantially reduced the incidence of uncomplicated and severe malaria in young children compared to either intervention alone. Given the possible negative effect of malaria on nutrition, the study investigated whether these children also experienced lower prevalence of acute and chronic malnutrition.

METHODS

In Burkina Faso and Mali 5920 children were randomized to receive either SMC alone, RTS,S/AS01_E alone, or SMC combined with RTS,S/AS01_E for three malaria transmission seasons (2017-2019). After each transmission season, anthropometric measurements were collected from all study children at a cross-sectional survey and used to derive nutritional status indicators, including the binary variables wasted and stunted (weight-for-height and height-for-age z-scores below - 2, respectively). Binary and continuous outcomes between treatment groups were compared by Poisson and linear regression.

RESULTS

In 2017, compared to SMC alone, the combined intervention reduced the prevalence of wasting by approximately 12% [prevalence ratio (PR) = 0.88 (95% CI 0.75, 1.03)], and approximately 21% in 2018 [PR = 0.79 (95% CI 0.62, 1.01)]. Point estimates were similar for comparisons with RTS,S/AS01_E, but there was stronger evidence of a difference. There was at least a 30% reduction in the point estimates for the prevalence of severe wasting in the combined group compared to the other two groups in 2017 and 2018. There was no difference in the prevalence of moderate or severe wasting between the groups in 2019. The prevalence of stunting, low-MUAC-for-age or being underweight did not differ between groups for any of the three years. The prevalence of severe stunting was higher in the combined group compared to both other groups in 2018, and compared to RTS,S/AS01_E alone in 2017; this observation does not have an obvious explanation and may be a chance finding. Overall, malnutrition was very common in this cohort, but declined over the study as the children became older.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a high burden of malnutrition and malaria in the study populations, and a major reduction in the incidence of malaria in children receiving both interventions, this had only a modest impact on nutritional status. Therefore, other interventions are needed to reduce the high burden of malnutrition in these areas.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03143218 , registered 8th May 2017.

Combining malaria vaccination with chemoprevention: a promising new approach to malaria control

Malaria control has stalled in a number of African countries and novel approaches to malaria control are needed for these areas. The encouraging results of a recent trial conducted in young children in Burkina Faso and Mali in which a combination of the RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine and seasonal malaria chemoprevention led to a substantial reduction in clinical cases of malaria, severe malaria, and malaria deaths compared with the administration of either intervention given alone suggests that there may be other epidemiological/clinical situations in which a combination of malaria vaccination and chemoprevention could be beneficial. Some of these potential opportunities are considered in this paper. These include combining vaccination with intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in infants, with intermittent preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy (through vaccination of women of child-bearing age before or during pregnancy), or with post-discharge malaria chemoprevention in the management of children recently admitted to hospital with severe anaemia. Other potential uses of the combination are prevention of malaria in children at particular risk from the adverse effects of clinical malaria, such as those with sickle cell disease, and during the final stages of a malaria elimination programme when vaccination could be combined with repeated rounds of mass drug administration. The combination of a pre-erythrocytic stage malaria vaccine with an effective chemopreventive regimen could make a valuable contribution to malaria control and elimination in a variety of clinical or epidemiological situations, and the potential of this approach to malaria control needs to be explored.

Reduced blood-stage malaria growth and immune correlates in humans following RH5 vaccination

BACKGROUND

Development of an effective vaccine against the pathogenic blood-stage infection of human malaria has proved challenging, and no candidate vaccine has affected blood-stage parasitemia following controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) with blood-stage Plasmodium falciparum.

METHODS

We undertook a phase I/IIa clinical trial in healthy adults in the United Kingdom of the RH5.1 recombinant protein vaccine, targeting the P. falciparum reticulocyte-binding protein homolog 5 (RH5), formulated in AS01B adjuvant. We assessed safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy against blood-stage CHMI. Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02927145.

FINDINGS

The RH5.1/AS01B formulation was administered using a range of RH5.1 protein vaccine doses (2, 10, and 50 μg) and was found to be safe and well tolerated. A regimen using a delayed and fractional third dose, in contrast to three doses given at monthly intervals, led to significantly improved antibody response longevity over ∼2 years of follow-up. Following primary and secondary CHMI of vaccinees with blood-stage P. falciparum, a significant reduction in parasite growth rate was observed, defining a milestone for the blood-stage malaria vaccine field. We show that growth inhibition activity measured in vitro using purified immunoglobulin G (IgG) antibody strongly correlates with in vivo reduction of the parasite growth rate and also identify other antibody feature sets by systems serology, including the plasma anti-RH5 IgA1 response, that are associated with challenge outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data provide a new framework to guide rational design and delivery of next-generation vaccines to protect against malaria disease.

FUNDING

This study was supported by USAID, UK MRC, Wellcome Trust, NIAID, and the NIHR Oxford-BRC.

Efficacy of a low-dose candidate malaria vaccine, R21 in adjuvant Matrix-M, with seasonal administration to children in Burkina Faso: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Stalled progress in controlling Plasmodium falciparum malaria highlights the need for an effective and deployable vaccine. RTS,S/AS01, the most effective malaria vaccine candidate to date, demonstrated 56% efficacy over 12 months in African children. We therefore assessed a new candidate vaccine for safety and efficacy.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 2b trial, the low-dose circumsporozoite protein-based vaccine R21, with two different doses of adjuvant Matrix-M (MM), was given to children aged 5-17 months in Nanoro, Burkina Faso-a highly seasonal malaria transmission setting. Three vaccinations were administered at 4-week intervals before the malaria season, with a fourth dose 1 year later. All vaccines were administered intramuscularly into the thigh. Group 1 received 5 μg R21 plus 25 μg MM, group 2 received 5 μg R21 plus 50 μg MM, and group 3, the control group, received rabies vaccinations. Children were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to groups 1-3. An independent statistician generated a random allocation list, using block randomisation with variable block sizes, which was used to assign participants. Participants, their families, and the local study team were all masked to group allocation. Only the pharmacists preparing the vaccine were unmasked to group allocation. Vaccine safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy were evaluated over 1 year. The primary objective assessed protective efficacy of R21 plus MM (R21/MM) from 14 days after the third vaccination to 6 months. Primary analyses of vaccine efficacy were based on a modified intention-to-treat population, which included all participants who received three vaccinations, allowing for inclusion of participants who received the wrong vaccine at any timepoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03896724.

FINDINGS

From May 7 to June 13, 2019, 498 children aged 5-17 months were screened, and 48 were excluded. 450 children were enrolled and received at least one vaccination. 150 children were allocated to group 1, 150 children were allocated to group 2, and 150 children were allocated to group 3. The final vaccination of the primary series was administered on Aug 7, 2019. R21/MM had a favourable safety profile and was well tolerated. The majority of adverse events were mild, with the most common event being fever. None of the seven serious adverse events were attributed to the vaccine. At the 6-month primary efficacy analysis, 43 (29%) of 146 participants in group 1, 38 (26%) of 146 participants in group 2, and 105 (71%) of 147 participants in group 3 developed clinical malaria. Vaccine efficacy was 74% (95% CI 63-82) in group 1 and 77% (67-84) in group 2 at 6 months. At 1 year, vaccine efficacy remained high, at 77% (67-84) in group 1. Participants vaccinated with R21/MM showed high titres of malaria-specific anti-Asn-Ala-Asn-Pro (NANP) antibodies 28 days after the third vaccination, which were almost doubled with the higher adjuvant dose. Titres waned but were boosted to levels similar to peak titres after the primary series of vaccinations after a fourth dose administered 1 year later.

INTERPRETATION

R21/MM appears safe and very immunogenic in African children, and shows promising high-level efficacy.

FUNDING

The European & Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership, Wellcome Trust, and National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre.