Assessing the safety, impact and effectiveness of RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine following its introduction in three sub-Saharan African countries: methodological approaches and study set-up

Background

Following a 30-year development process, RTS,S/AS01_E (GSK, Belgium) is the first malaria vaccine to reach Phase IV assessments. The World Health Organization-commissioned Malaria Vaccine Implementation Programme (MVIP) is coordinating the delivery of RTS,S/AS01_E through routine national immunization programmes in areas of 3 countries in sub-Saharan Africa. The first doses were given in the participating MVIP areas in Malawi on 23 April, Ghana on 30 April, and Kenya on 13 September 2019. The countries participating in the MVIP have little or no baseline incidence data on rare diseases, some of which may be associated with immunization, a deficit that could compromise the interpretation of possible adverse events reported following the introduction of a new vaccine in the paediatric population. Further, effects of vaccination on malaria transmission, existing malaria control strategies, and possible vaccine-mediated selective pressure on Plasmodium falciparum variants, could also impact long-term malaria control. To address this data gap and as part of its post-approval commitments, GSK has developed a post-approval plan comprising of 4 complementary Phase IV studies that will evaluate safety, effectiveness and impact of RTS,S/AS01_E through active participant follow-up in the context of its real-life implementation.

Methods

EPI-MAL-002 (NCT02374450) is a pre-implementation safety surveillance study that is establishing the background incidence rates of protocol-defined adverse events of special interest. EPI-MAL-003 (NCT03855995) is an identically designed post-implementation safety and vaccine impact study. EPI-MAL-005 (NCT02251704) is a cross-sectional pre- and post-implementation study to measure malaria transmission intensity and monitor the use of other malaria control interventions in the study areas, and EPI-MAL-010 (EUPAS42948) will evaluate the P. falciparum genetic diversity in the periods before and after vaccine implementation.

Conclusion

GSK’s post-approval plan has been designed to address important knowledge gaps in RTS,S/AS01_E vaccine safety, effectiveness and impact. The studies are currently being conducted in the MVIP areas. Their implementation has provided opportunities and posed challenges linked to conducting large studies in regions where healthcare infrastructure is limited. The results from these studies will support ongoing evaluation of RTS,S/AS01_E’s benefit-risk and inform decision-making for its potential wider implementation across sub-Saharan Africa.

Graphic abstract

Potential effect modification of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine efficacy by household socio-economic status

Background

In the phase III RTS,S /AS01 trial, significant heterogeneity in efficacy of the vaccine across study sites was seen. Question on whether variations in socio - economic status (SES) of participant contributed to the heterogeinity of the vaccine efficacy (VE) remains unknown.

Methods

Data from the Phase III RTS,S /AS01 trial in children aged 5–17 months in Kintampo were re-analysed. SES of each child was derived from the Kintampo Health and Demographic Surveillance System, using principal component analysis of household assets. Extended Cox regression was used to estimate the interaction between RTS,S/AS01 VE and household SES.

Results

Protective efficacy of the RTS,S/AS0 vaccine significantly varied by participant’s household SES, thus increase in household SES was associated with an increase in protective efficacy (P-value = 0.0041). Effect modification persisted after adjusting for age at first vaccination, gender, distance from community to the health facility, child’s haemoglobin level, household size, place of residence and mothers’ educational level.

Conclusion

Household SES may be a proxy for malaria transmission intensity. The study showed a significant modification of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine efficacy by the different levels of child’s household socio - economic status.

Trial registration

Efficacy of GSK Biologicals’ candidate malaria vaccine (25049) against malaria disease in infants and children in Africa. NCT00866619 prospectively registered on 20 March 2009.

Estimating Annual Fluctuations in Malaria Transmission Intensity and in the Use of Malaria Control Interventions in Five Sub-Saharan African Countries

RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccine safety, effectiveness, and impact will be assessed in pre- and post-vaccine introduction studies, comparing the occurrence of malaria cases and adverse events in vaccinated versus unvaccinated children. Because those comparisons may be confounded by potential year-to-year fluctuations in malaria transmission intensity and malaria control intervention usage, the latter should be carefully monitored to adequately adjust the analyses. This observational cross-sectional study is assessing Plasmodium falciparum parasite prevalence (PfPR) and malaria control intervention usage over nine annual surveys performed at peak parasite transmission. Plasmodium falciparum parasite prevalence was measured by microscopy and nucleic acid amplification test (quantitative PCR) in parallel in all participants, and defined as the proportion of infected participants among participants tested. Results of surveys 1 (S1) and 2 (S2), conducted in five sub-Saharan African countries, including some participating in the Malaria Vaccine Implementation Programme (MVIP), are reported herein; 4,208 and 4,199 children were, respectively, included in the analyses. Plasmodium falciparum parasite prevalence estimated using microscopy varied between study sites in both surveys, with the lowest prevalence in Senegalese sites and the highest in Burkina Faso. In sites located in the MVIP areas (Kintampo and Kombewa), PfPR in children aged 6 months to 4 years ranged from 24.8% to 27.3%, depending on the study site and the survey. Overall, 89.5% and 86.4% of children used a bednet in S1 and S2, of whom 68.7% and 77.9% used impregnated bednets. No major difference was observed between the two surveys in terms of PfPR or use of malaria control interventions.

Immunogenicity and safety of the RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine co-administered with measles, rubella and yellow fever vaccines in Ghanaian children: A phase IIIb, multi-center, non-inferiority, randomized, open, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

To optimize vaccine implementation visits for young children, it could be efficient to administer the first RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine dose during the Expanded Programme on Immunization (EPI) visit at 6 months of age together with Vitamin A supplementation and the third RTS,S/AS01 dose on the same day as yellow fever (YF), measles and rubella vaccines at 9 months of age. We evaluated the safety and immunogenicity of RTS,S/AS01 when co-administered with YF and combined measles-rubella (MR) vaccines.

METHODS

In this phase 3b, open-label, controlled study (NCT02699099), 709 Ghanaian children were randomized (1:1:1) to receive RTS,S/AS01 at 6, 7.5 and 9 months of age, and YF and MR vaccines at 9 or 10.5 months of age (RTS,S coad and RTS,S alone groups, respectively). The third group received YF and MR vaccines at 9 months of age and will receive RTS,S/AS01 at 10.5, 11.5 and 12.5 months of age (Control group). All children received Vitamin A at 6 months of age. Non-inferiority of immune responses to the vaccine antigens was evaluated 1 month following co-administration versus RTS,S/AS01 or EPI vaccines (YF and MR vaccines) alone using pre-defined non-inferiority criteria. Safety was assessed until Study month 4.5.

RESULTS

Non-inferiority of antibody responses to the anti-circumsporozoite and anti-hepatitis B virus surface antigens when RTS,S/AS01 was co-administered with YF and MR vaccines versus RTS,S/AS01 alone was demonstrated. Non-inferiority of antibody responses to the measles, rubella, and YF antigens when RTS,S/AS01 was co-administered with YF and MR vaccines versus YF and MR vaccines alone was demonstrated. The safety profile of all vaccines was clinically acceptable in all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

RTS,S/AS01 can be co-administered with Vitamin A at 6 months and with YF and MR vaccines at 9 months of age during EPI visits, without immune response impairment to any vaccine antigen or negative safety effect.

Community perception and beliefs about blood draw for clinical research in Ghana

BACKGROUND

Clinical research participants often express concerns about blood draw because of misconceptions about the uses to which the blood will be put. Their comments can generate rumours in their communities, thereby affecting rates of recruitment to research studies and increasing losses to follow-up. This study sought to identify community perceptions about blood draw for clinical research.

METHODS

Between September 2010 and March 2011, 12 focus group discussions and eight in-depth interviews were conducted among community members in the Kintampo district of Ghana, to determine what cultural beliefs and traditional practices might affect attitudes to blood draw.

RESULTS

Most of the study participants did not mention any cultural beliefs prohibiting blood draw but were of the opinion that collecting blood from children and pregnant women could lead to serious health consequences. They could not understand why blood would be taken from participants who were not sick. Some were of the opinion that blood samples could be used for rituals and others recounted unpleasant experiences following blood draws.

CONCLUSION

To facilitate clinical research that entails blood draw, it is important to address concerns and rumours through intensive community sensitisation.

A phase 3 trial of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in African infants

BACKGROUND

The candidate malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS01 reduced episodes of both clinical and severe malaria in children 5 to 17 months of age by approximately 50% in an ongoing phase 3 trial. We studied infants 6 to 12 weeks of age recruited for the same trial.

METHODS

We administered RTS,S/AS01 or a comparator vaccine to 6537 infants who were 6 to 12 weeks of age at the time of the first vaccination in conjunction with Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) vaccines in a three-dose monthly schedule. Vaccine efficacy against the first or only episode of clinical malaria during the 12 months after vaccination, a coprimary end point, was analyzed with the use of Cox regression. Vaccine efficacy against all malaria episodes, vaccine efficacy against severe malaria, safety, and immunogenicity were also assessed.

RESULTS

The incidence of the first or only episode of clinical malaria in the intention-to-treat population during the 14 months after the first dose of vaccine was 0.31 per person-year in the RTS,S/AS01 group and 0.40 per person-year in the control group, for a vaccine efficacy of 30.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.6 to 36.1). Vaccine efficacy in the per-protocol population was 31.3% (97.5% CI, 23.6 to 38.3). Vaccine efficacy against severe malaria was 26.0% (95% CI, -7.4 to 48.6) in the intention-to-treat population and 36.6% (95% CI, 4.6 to 57.7) in the per-protocol population. Serious adverse events occurred with a similar frequency in the two study groups. One month after administration of the third dose of RTS,S/AS01, 99.7% of children were positive for anti-circumsporozoite antibodies, with a geometric mean titer of 209 EU per milliliter (95% CI, 197 to 222).

CONCLUSIONS

The RTS,S/AS01 vaccine coadministered with EPI vaccines provided modest protection against both clinical and severe malaria in young infants. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals and the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative; RTS,S ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00866619.).

First results of phase 3 trial of RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine in African children

BACKGROUND

An ongoing phase 3 study of the efficacy, safety, and immunogenicity of candidate malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS01 is being conducted in seven African countries.

METHODS

From March 2009 through January 2011, we enrolled 15,460 children in two age categories--6 to 12 weeks of age and 5 to 17 months of age--for vaccination with either RTS,S/AS01 or a non-malaria comparator vaccine. The primary end point of the analysis was vaccine efficacy against clinical malaria during the 12 months after vaccination in the first 6000 children 5 to 17 months of age at enrollment who received all three doses of vaccine according to protocol. After 250 children had an episode of severe malaria, we evaluated vaccine efficacy against severe malaria in both age categories.

RESULTS

In the 14 months after the first dose of vaccine, the incidence of first episodes of clinical malaria in the first 6000 children in the older age category was 0.32 episodes per person-year in the RTS,S/AS01 group and 0.55 episodes per person-year in the control group, for an efficacy of 50.4% (95% confidence interval [CI], 45.8 to 54.6) in the intention-to-treat population and 55.8% (97.5% CI, 50.6 to 60.4) in the per-protocol population. Vaccine efficacy against severe malaria was 45.1% (95% CI, 23.8 to 60.5) in the intention-to-treat population and 47.3% (95% CI, 22.4 to 64.2) in the per-protocol population. Vaccine efficacy against severe malaria in the combined age categories was 34.8% (95% CI, 16.2 to 49.2) in the per-protocol population during an average follow-up of 11 months. Serious adverse events occurred with a similar frequency in the two study groups. Among children in the older age category, the rate of generalized convulsive seizures after RTS,S/AS01 vaccination was 1.04 per 1000 doses (95% CI, 0.62 to 1.64).

CONCLUSIONS

The RTS,S/AS01 vaccine provided protection against both clinical and severe malaria in African children. (Funded by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals and the PATH Malaria Vaccine Initiative; RTS,S ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00866619 .).

Community perceptions of malaria and malaria treatment behaviour in a rural district of Ghana: implications for artemisinin combination therapy

BACKGROUND

Artesunate-amodiaquine (AS-AQ) was introduced in Ghana as the first line drug for treatment of uncomplicated malaria in 2004. We report the perceptions of malaria and malaria treatment behaviour, the community awareness of and perceptions about AS-AQ two years after the introduction of this ACT treatment for malaria.

METHODS

Two surveys were conducted; a cross-sectional survey of 729 randomly selected household heads (urban-362, rural-367) and 282 women with children < 5 years (urban-121, rural-161) was conducted in 2006. A district wide survey was conducted in 2007 to assess awareness of AS-AQ. These were complemented with twenty-eight focus group discussions (FGDs) and 16 key informant interviews (KII) among community members and major stakeholders in the health care delivery services. All nine (9) health facilities and five (5) purposively selected drug stores were audited in order to identify commonly used anti-malarials in the study area at the time of the survey.

RESULTS

Majority of respondents ( > 75%) in the sampled survey mentioned mosquito bites as the cause of malaria. Other causes mentioned include environmental factors (e.g. dirty surroundings) and standing in the sun. Close to 60% of the household heads and 40% of the care-givers interviewed did not know about AS-AQ. The community respondents who knew about and had ever taken AS-AQ perceived it to be a good drug; although they mentioned they had experienced some side effects including headaches and body weakness. Co-blistered AS-AQ was available in all the government health facilities in the study area. Different formulations of ACTs were however found in urban chemical shops but not in rural chemical stores where monotherapy antimalarials were predominant.

CONCLUSION

The knowledge of fever as a symptom of malaria is high among the study population. The awareness of AS-AQ therapy and its side-effect was low in the study area. Community education and sensitization, targeting all categories of the population, has to be intensified to ensure an efficient implementation process.