Search

Background: Group B streptococcus is the leading cause of infection in infants. Currently, intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis is the major strategy to prevent invasive group B streptococcus disease. However, intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis does not prevent maternal sepsis, premature births, stillbirths or late-onset disease. Maternal vaccination may offer an alternative strategy. Multivalent polysaccharide protein conjugate vaccine development is under way and a serocorrelate of protection is needed to expedite vaccine licensure., Objectives: The ultimate aim of this work is to determine the correlate of protection against the major group B streptococcus disease-causing serotypes in infants in the UK. The aim of this feasibility study is to test key operational aspects of the study design., Design: Prospective cohort study of pregnant women and their infants in a 6-month period (1 July to 31 December 2018)., Setting: Five secondary and tertiary hospitals from London and South England. National iGBS disease surveillance was conducted in all trusts in England and Wales., Participants: Pregnant women aged ≥ 18 years who were delivering at one of the selected hospitals and who provided consent during the study period. There were no exclusion criteria., Interventions: No interventions were performed., Main Outcome Measures: (1) To test the feasibility of collecting serum at delivery from a large cohort of pregnant women. (2) To test the key operational aspects for a proposed large serocorrelates study. (3) To test the feasibility of collecting samples from those with invasive group B streptococcus., Results: A total of 1823 women were recruited during the study period. Overall, 85% of serum samples were collected at three sites collecting only cord blood. At the two sites collecting maternal, cord and infant blood samples, the collection rate was 60%. A total of 614 women were screened for group B streptococcus with a colonisation rate of 22% (serotype distribution: 30% III, 25% Ia, 16% II, 14% Ib, 14% V and 1% IV). A blood sample was collected from 34 infants who were born to colonised women. Maternal and infant blood and the bacterial isolates for 15 newborns who developed invasive group B streptococcal disease during the study period were collected (serotype distribution: 29% III, 29% II, 21% Ia, 7% Ib, 7% IV and 7% V)., Limitations: Recruitment and sample collection were dependent on the presence of research midwives rather than the whole clinical team. In addition, individualised consent limited the number of women who could be approached each day, and site set-up for the national surveillance study and the limited time period of this feasibility study limited recruitment of all eligible participants., Conclusions: We have verified the feasibility of collecting and processing rectovaginal swabs and blood samples in pregnant women, as well as samples from those with invasive group B streptococcal disease. We have made recommendations for the recruitment of cases within the proposed GBS3 study and for controls both within GBS3 and as an extension of this feasibility study., Future Work: A large case-control study comparing specific immunoglobulin G levels in mothers whose infants develop invasive group B streptococcal disease with those in colonised mothers whose infants do not develop invasive group B streptococcal disease is recommended., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN49326091; IRAS project identification number 246149/REC reference number 18/WM/0147., Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment ; Vol. 23, No. 67. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information., Competing Interests: Kirsty Le Doare has received a travel grant from Pfizer (New York, NY, USA). Paul Heath is an investigator for clinical trials (not group B streptococcus-specific) who carries out work on behalf of St George’s, University of London, and is sponsored by various vaccine manufacturers, including Novartis (Basel, Switzerland), Pfizer and GlaxoSmithKline plc (Brentford, UK). Asma Khalil has been a member of the Health Technology Assessment General Committee since November 2018, and is due to be active until 2022.

Background: Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a promising strategy to break COVID-19 transmission. Although hydroxychloroquine was evaluated for treatment and post-exposure prophylaxis, it is not evaluated for COVID-19 PrEP yet. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of PrEP with hydroxychloroquine against placebo in healthcare workers at high risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection during an epidemic period.Methods: We conducted a double-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial in three hospitals in Barcelona, Spain. From 350 adult healthcare workers screened, we included 269 participants with no active or past SARS-CoV-2 infection (determined by a negative nasopharyngeal SARS-CoV-2 PCR and a negative serology against SARS-CoV-2). Participants allocated in the intervention arm (PrEP) received 400 mg of hydroxychloroquine daily for the first four consecutive days and subsequently, 400 mg weekly during the study period. Participants in the control group followed the same treatment schedule with placebo tablets.Results: 52.8% (142/269) of participants were in the hydroxychloroquine arm and 47.2% (127/269) in the placebo arm. Given the national epidemic incidence decay, only one participant in each group was diagnosed with COVID-19. The trial was stopped due to futility and our study design was deemed underpowered to evaluate any benefit regarding PrEP efficacy. Both groups showed a similar proportion of participants experiencing at least one adverse event (AE) (p=0.548). No serious AEs were reported. Almost all AEs (96.4%, 106/110) were mild. Only mild gastrointestinal symptoms were significantly higher in the hydroxychloroquine arm compared to the placebo arm (27.4% (39/142) vs 15.7% (20/127), p=0.041).Conclusions: Although the efficacy of PrEP with hydroxychloroquine for preventing COVID-19 could not be evaluated, our study showed that PrEP with hydroxychloroquine at low doses is safe.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04331834 . Registered on April 2, 2020. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]