Search

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 AS01 B adjuvant. We assessed safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy against blood-stage CHMI. Trial registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02927145., Findings: The RH5.1/AS01 B 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., Competing Interests: A.D.D. and S.J.D. are named inventors on patent applications relating to RH5 and/or other malaria vaccines and immunization regimens. W.A.d.J. is an employee of and shareholder in ExpreS2ion Biotechnologies, which has developed and is marketing the ExpreS2 cell expression platform. A.R.N. is an employee of Leidos, Inc., which holds the MVDP prime contract (AID-OAA-C-15-00071). A.M.M. has an immediate family member who is an inventor on patents relating to RH5 and/or other malaria vaccines and immunization regimens., (© 2021 The Author(s).)

Background: Cases of Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) infection continue to rise in the Arabian Peninsula 7 years after it was first described in Saudi Arabia. MERS-CoV poses a significant risk to public health security because of an absence of currently available effective countermeasures. We aimed to assess the safety and immunogenicity of the candidate simian adenovirus-vectored vaccine expressing the full-length spike surface glycoprotein, ChAdOx1 MERS, in humans., Methods: This dose-escalation, open-label, non-randomised, uncontrolled, phase 1 trial was done at the Centre for Clinical Vaccinology and Tropical Medicine (Oxford, UK) and included healthy people aged 18-50 years with negative pre-vaccination tests for HIV antibodies, hepatitis B surface antigen, and hepatitis C antibodies (and a negative urinary pregnancy test for women). Participants received a single intramuscular injection of ChAdOx1 MERS at three different doses: the low-dose group received 5 × 10 9 viral particles, the intermediate-dose group received 2·5 × 10 10 viral particles, and the high-dose group received 5 × 10 10 viral particles. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability of ChAdOx1 MERS, measured by the occurrence of solicited, unsolicited, and serious adverse events after vaccination. The secondary objective was to assess the cellular and humoral immunogenicity of ChAdOx1 MERS, measured by interferon-γ-linked enzyme-linked immunospot, ELISA, and virus neutralising assays after vaccination. Participants were followed up for up to 12 months. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03399578., Findings: Between March 14 and Aug 15, 2018, 24 participants were enrolled: six were assigned to the low-dose group, nine to the intermediate-dose group, and nine to the high-dose group. All participants were available for follow-up at 6 months, but five (one in the low-dose group, one in the intermediate-dose group, and three in the high-dose group) were lost to follow-up at 12 months. A single dose of ChAdOx1 MERS was safe at doses up to 5 × 10 10 viral particles with no vaccine-related serious adverse events reported by 12 months. One serious adverse event reported was deemed to be not related to ChAdOx1 MERS. 92 (74% [95% CI 66-81]) of 124 solicited adverse events were mild, 31 (25% [18-33]) were moderate, and all were self-limiting. Unsolicited adverse events in the 28 days following vaccination considered to be possibly, probably, or definitely related to ChAdOx1 MERS were predominantly mild in nature and resolved within the follow-up period of 12 months. The proportion of moderate and severe adverse events was significantly higher in the high-dose group than in the intermediate-dose group (relative risk 5·83 [95% CI 2·11-17·42], p<0·0001) Laboratory adverse events considered to be at least possibly related to the study intervention were self-limiting and predominantly mild in severity. A significant increase from baseline in T-cell (p<0·003) and IgG (p<0·0001) responses to the MERS-CoV spike antigen was observed at all doses. Neutralising antibodies against live MERS-CoV were observed in four (44% [95% CI 19-73]) of nine participants in the high-dose group 28 days after vaccination, and 19 (79% [58-93]) of 24 participants had antibodies capable of neutralisation in a pseudotyped virus neutralisation assay., Interpretation: ChAdOx1 MERS was safe and well tolerated at all tested doses. A single dose was able to elicit both humoral and cellular responses against MERS-CoV. The results of this first-in-human clinical trial support clinical development progression into field phase 1b and 2 trials., Funding: UK Department of Health and Social Care, using UK Aid funding, managed by the UK National Institute for Health Research., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY 4.0 license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Background: The 2014 West African outbreak of Ebola virus disease highlighted the urgent need to develop an effective Ebola vaccine., Methods: We undertook 2 phase 1 studies assessing safety and immunogenicity of the viral vector modified vaccinia Ankara virus vectored Ebola Zaire vaccine (MVA-EBO-Z), manufactured rapidly on a new duck cell line either alone or in a heterologous prime-boost regimen with recombinant chimpanzee adenovirus type 3 vectored Ebola Zaire vaccine (ChAd3-EBO-Z) followed by MVA-EBO-Z. Adult volunteers in the United Kingdom (n = 38) and Senegal (n = 40) were vaccinated and an accelerated 1-week prime-boost regimen was assessed in Senegal. Safety was assessed by active and passive collection of local and systemic adverse events., Results: The standard and accelerated heterologous prime-boost regimens were well-tolerated and elicited potent cellular and humoral immunogenicity in the United Kingdom and Senegal, but vaccine-induced antibody responses were significantly lower in Senegal. Cellular immune responses measured by flow cytometry were significantly greater in African vaccinees receiving ChAd3 and MVA vaccines in the same rather than the contralateral limb., Conclusions: MVA biomanufactured on an immortalized duck cell line shows potential for very large-scale manufacturing with lower cost of goods. This first trial of MVA-EBO-Z in humans encourages further testing in phase 2 studies, with the 1-week prime-boost interval regimen appearing to be particularly suitable for outbreak control., Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02451891; NCT02485912., (© The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

The implementation of audit in most hospital departments in the UK has been instigated by the guidelines set out by the Royal Colleges. This paper aims to demonstrate the results of regular subregional audit meetings in the ENT departments involving three District Hospitals in East Anglia. We report the effects of audit meetings in improving the management of epistaxis, whereby a protocol for treatment and discharge was established, the duration of the nasal pack left in situ was reduced, and the material of the pack was changed.