Search

BackgroundOmicron-containing bivalent boosters are available worldwide. Results of a large, randomized, active-controlled study are presented.MethodsThis phase 3, randomized, observer-blind, active-controlled trial in the United Kingdom evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of 50-µg doses of omicron-BA.1-monovalent mRNA-1273.529 and bivalent mRNA-1273.214 booster vaccines compared with 50-µg mRNA-1273 administered as boosters in individuals ≥16 years. Participants had previously received 2 doses of any authorized/approved Covid-19 vaccine with or without an mRNA vaccine booster. Safety and immunogenicity were primary objectives; immunogenicity was assessed in all participants, with analysis conducted based on prior infection status. Incidence of Covid-19 post-boost was a secondary (mRNA-1273.214) or exploratory (mRNA-1273.529) objective.ResultsIn part 1 of the study, 719 participants received mRNA-1273.529 (n=362) or mRNA-1273 (n=357); in part 2, 2813 received mRNA-1273.214 (n=1418) or mRNA-1273 (n=1395). Median durations (months [interquartile range]) between the most recent Covid-19 vaccine and study boosters were similar in the mRNA-1273.529 (4.0 [3.6-4.7]) and mRNA-1273 (4.1 [3.5-4.7]) (part 1), and mRNA-1273.214 (5.5 [4.8-6.2] and mRNA-1273 (5.4 [4.8-6.2]) groups (part 2).Both mRNA-1273.529 and mRNA-1273.214 elicited superior neutralizing antibody responses against omicron BA.1 with geometric mean ratios (99% CIs) of 1.68 (1.45-1.95) and 1.53 (1.41-1.67) compared to mRNA-1273 at day 29 post-boost. Although the study was not powered to assess relative vaccine efficacy, the incidence rates/1000 person years (95% CI) of Covid-19 trended lower with mRNA-1273.529 (670.5 [528.3-839.3]) than mRNA-1273 (769.3 [615.4-950.1]) and mRNA-1273.214 (633.0 [538.1-739.7]) than mRNA-1273 (711.6 [607.5-828.5]).Sequence analysis in part 2 showed that this was driven by lower incidence of Covid-19 in the mRNA-1273.214 cohort with BA.2 and BA.4 sublineages but not BA.5 sublineages. All study boosters were well-tolerated.ConclusionThe bivalent omicron BA.1-containing booster elicited superior neutralizing antibody responses against omicron BA.1 with acceptable safety results consistent with the BA.1 monovalent vaccine. Incidence rates for Covid-19 were numerically lower in participants who received mRNA-1273.214 compared to the original booster vaccine mRNA-1273, driven by the BA.2 and BA.4 sublineages.

Current international guidelines recommend routinely vaccinating haematopoetic stem cell transplant (HSCT) recipients. Despite significant infection-related mortality following autologous HSCT, routine vaccination programmes (RVP) completion is poor. For recovered HSCT recipients, it is uncertain whether catch-up vaccination remains worthwhile years later. To determine potential susceptibility to vaccine preventable infections, we measured antibody titres in 56 patients, a median of 7 years (range 0–29) following autologous HSCT, who had not completed RVP. We found that almost all participants had inadequate titres against diphtheria (98.2%) and pneumococcal infection (100%), and a significant proportion had inadequate titres against measles (34.5%). Of those subsequently vaccinated according to available guidelines, many mounted adequate serological responses. These data suggest a pragmatic catch-up approach for autologous HSCT recipients who have not completed RVP is advisable, with universal vaccination against some pathogens (e.g. Streptococcus pneumoniae and diphtheria) and serologically-guided approaches for others (e.g. measles and varicella zoster virus).

The peer commentaries on our Target Article, “Promoting Ethical Payment in Human Infection Challenge Studies,” (Fernandez Lynch et al. 2021) offer a number of insights that will help advance the co...

Infections with Salmonella enterica serovars Typhi and Paratyphi A cause an estimated 14 million cases of enteric fever annually. Here, the controlled nature of challenge studies is exploited to identify genetic variants associated with enteric fever susceptibility. Human challenge participants were genotyped by Illumina OmniExpress-24 BeadChip array (n = 176) and/or transcriptionally profiled by RNA sequencing (n = 174). While the study was underpowered to detect any single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) significant at the whole-genome level, two SNPs within CAPN14 and MIATNB were identified with P

Human challenge trials (HCTs) have been proposed as a means to accelerate SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development. We identify and discuss 3 potential use cases of HCTs in the current pandemic: evaluating efficacy, converging on correlates of protection, and improving understanding of pathogenesis and the human immune response. We outline the limitations of HCTs and find that HCTs are likely to be most useful for vaccine candidates currently in preclinical stages of development. We conclude that, while currently limited in their application, there are scenarios in which HCTs would be extremely beneficial. Therefore, the option of conducting HCTs to accelerate SARS-CoV-2 vaccine development should be preserved. As HCTs require many months of preparation, we recommend an immediate effort to (1) establish guidelines for HCTs for COVID-19; (2) take the first steps toward HCTs, including preparing challenge virus and making preliminary logistical arrangements; and (3) commit to periodically re-evaluating the utility of HCTs.

Background: Typhoid and paratyphoid fever (enteric fever) is a common cause of non-specific febrile infection in adults and children presenting to health care facilities in low resource settings such as the South Asia. A 7-day course of a single oral antimicrobial such as ciprofloxacin, cefixime, or azithromycin is commonly used for its treatment. Increasing antimicrobial resistance threatens the effectiveness of these treatment choices. We hypothesize that combined treatment with azithromycin (active mainly intracellularly) and cefixime (active mainly extracellularly) will be a better option for the treatment of clinically suspected and culture-confirmed typhoid fever in South Asia. Methods: This is a phase IV, international multi-center, multi-country, comparative participant-and observer-blind, 1:1 randomised clinical trial. Patients with suspected uncomplicated typhoid fever will be randomized to one of the two interventions: Arm A: azithromycin 20mg/kg/day oral dose once daily (maximum 1gm/day) and cefixime 20mg/kg/day oral dose in two divided doses (maximum 400mg bd) for 7 days, Arm B: azithromycin 20mg/kg/day oral dose once daily (max 1gm/day) for 7 days AND cefixime-matched placebo for 7 days. We will recruit 1500 patients across sites in Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. We will assess whether treatment outcomes are better with the combination after one week of treatment and at one- and three-months follow-up. Discussion: Combined treatment may limit the emergence of resistance if one of the components is active against resistant sub-populations not covered by the other antimicrobial activity. If the combined treatment is better than the single antimicrobial treatment, this will be an important result for patients across South Asia and other typhoid endemic areas. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT04349826 (16/04/2020)

BackgroundWe aimed to measure SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence in a cohort of healthcare workers (HCWs) during the first UK wave of the COVID-19 pandemic, explore risk factors associated with infection, and investigate the impact of antibody titres on assay sensitivity.MethodsHCWs at Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (STH) were prospectively enrolled and sampled at two time points. SARS-CoV-2 antibodies were tested using an in-house assay for IgG and IgA reactivity against Spike and Nucleoprotein (sensitivity 99·47%, specificity 99·56%). Data were analysed using three statistical models: a seroprevalence model, an antibody kinetics model, and a heterogeneous sensitivity model.FindingsAs of 12th June 2020, 24·4% (n=311/1275) HCWs were seropositive. Of these, 39·2% (n=122/311) were asymptomatic. The highest adjusted seroprevalence was measured in HCWs on the Acute Medical Unit (41·1%, 95% CrI 30·0–52·9) and in Physiotherapists and Occupational Therapists (39·2%, 95% CrI 24·4–56·5). Older age groups showed overall higher median antibody titres. Further modelling suggests that, for a serological assay with an overall sensitivity of 80%, antibody titres may be markedly affected by differences in age, with sensitivity estimates of 89% in those over 60 years but 61% in those ≤30 years.InterpretationHCWs in acute medical units working closely with COVID-19 patients were at highest risk of infection, though whether these are infections acquired from patients or other staff is unknown. Current serological assays may underestimate seroprevalence in younger age groups if validated using sera from older and/or more symptomatic individuals.Research in contextEvidence before this studyWe searched PubMed for studies published up to March 6th 2021, using the terms “COVID”, “SARS-CoV-2”, “seroprevalence”, and “healthcare workers”, and in addition for articles of antibody titres in different age groups against coronaviruses using “coronavirus”, “SARS-CoV-2, “antibody”, “antibody tires”, “COVID” and “age”. We included studies that used serology to estimate prevalence in healthcare workers. SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence has been shown to be greater in healthcare workers working on acute medical units or within domestic services. Antibody levels against seasonal coronaviruses, SARS-CoV and SARS-CoV-2 were found to be higher in older adults, and patients who were hospitalised.Added value of this studyIn this healthcare worker seroprevalence modelling study at a large NHS foundation trust, we confirm that those working on acute medical units, COVID-19 “Red Zones” and within domestic services are most likely to be seropositive. Furthermore, we show that physiotherapists and occupational therapists have an increased risk of COVID-19 infection. We also confirm that antibody titres are greater in older individuals, even in the context of non-hospitalised cases. Importantly, we demonstrate that this can result in age-specific sensitivity in serological assays, where lower antibody titres in younger individuals results in lower assay sensitivity.Implications of all the available evidenceThere are distinct occupational roles and locations in hospitals where the risk of COVID-19 infection to healthcare workers is greatest, and this knowledge should be used to prioritise infection prevention control and other measures to protect healthcare workers. Serological assays may have different sensitivity profiles across different age groups, especially if assay validation was undertaken using samples from older and/or hospitalised patients, who tend to have higher antibody titres. Future seroprevalence studies should consider adjusting for age-specific assay sensitivities to estimate true seroprevalence rates.Author Contributions

Background Enteric fever is a serious public health concern in many low-income and middle-income countries. Numerous data gaps exist concerning the epidemiology of Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi (S Typhi) and Salmonella enterica serotype Paratyphi (S Paratyphi), which are the causative agents of enteric fever. We aimed to determine the burden of enteric fever in three urban sites in Africa and Asia. Methods In this multicentre population-based study, we did a demographic census at three urban sites in Africa (Blantyre, Malawi) and Asia (Kathmandu, Nepal and Dhaka, Bangladesh) between June 1, 2016, and Sept 25, 2018. Households were selected randomly from the demographic census. Participants from within the geographical census area presenting to study health-care facilities were approached for recruitment if they had a history of fever for 72 h or more (later changed to >48 h) or temperature of 38·0°C or higher. Facility-based passive surveillance was done between Nov 11, 2016, and Dec 31, 2018, with blood-culture collection for febrile illness. We also did a community-based serological survey to obtain data on Vi-antibody defined infections. We calculated crude incidence for blood-culture-confirmed S Typhi and S Paratyphi infection, and calculated adjusted incidence and seroincidence of S Typhi blood-culture-confirmed infection. Findings 423 618 individuals were included in the demographic census, contributing 626 219 person-years of observation for febrile illness surveillance. 624 S Typhi and 108 S Paratyphi A isolates were collected from the blood of 12 082 febrile patients. Multidrug resistance was observed in 44% S Typhi isolates and fluoroquinolone resistance in 61% of S Typhi isolates. In Blantyre, the overall crude incidence of blood-culture confirmed S Typhi was 58 cases per 100 000 person-years of observation (95% CI 48–70); the adjusted incidence was 444 cases per 100 000 person-years of observation (95% credible interval [CrI] 347–717). The corresponding rates were 74 (95% CI 62–87) and 1062 (95% CrI 683–1839) in Kathmandu, and 161 (95% CI 145–179) and 1135 (95% CrI 898–1480) in Dhaka. S Paratyphi was not found in Blantyre; overall crude incidence of blood-culture-confirmed S Paratyphi A infection was 6 cases per 100 000 person-years of observation (95% CI 3–11) in Kathmandu and 42 (95% CI 34–52) in Dhaka. Seroconversion rates for S Typhi infection per 100 000 person-years estimated from anti-Vi seroconversion episodes in serological surveillance were 2505 episodes (95% CI 1605–3727) in Blantyre, 7631 (95% CI 5913–9691) in Kathmandu, and 3256 (95% CI 2432–4270) in Dhaka. Interpretation High disease incidence and rates of antimicrobial resistance were observed across three different transmission settings and thus necessitate multiple intervention strategies to achieve global control of these pathogens. Funding Wellcome Trust and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

In human challenge trials (HCTs), volunteers are deliberately infected with an infectious agent. Such trials can be used to accelerate vaccine development and answer important scientific questions. Starting early in the COVID-19 pandemic, ethical concerns were raised about using HCTs to accelerate development and approval of a vaccine. Some of those concerns pertained to potential exploitation of and/or lack of truly informed consent from volunteers. Specific areas of concern arose around individuals who may be unusually risk-seeking or too economically vulnerable to refuse the payments these trials provide, as opposed to being motivated primarily by altruistic goals. This pre-registered study is the first large-scale survey to characterize people who, early in the pandemic, expressed interest and intention to volunteer to participate in COVID-19 HCTs. We found that individuals expressing interest in SARS-CoV-2 HCTs exhibit consistently altruistic motivations without any special indication of poor risk perception or economic vulnerability. In finding that, early in the pandemic, COVID-19 HCTs were able to attract volunteers whose values align with the nature of these trials, and who are not unusually vulnerable to exploitation, this study may allay some ethical concerns about the volunteers interested in participating in such trials.

The burden of Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi (S. Typhi) shedding in stool and its contribution to transmission in endemic settings is unknown. During passive surveillance S. Typhi shedding was seen during convalescence in 332 bacteremic patient with typhoid, although none persisted at 1-year follow-up. Anti–virulence capsule (Vi)–immunoglobulin (Ig) G titers were measured in age-stratified cohort of serosurveillance participants. Systematic stool sampling of 303 participants with high anti–Vi-IgG titers identified 1 asymptomatic carrier with shedding. These findings suggest that ongoing S. Typhi transmission in this setting is more likely to occur from acute convalescent cases, although better approaches are needed to identify true chronic carriers in the community to enable typhoid elimination.

Background COVID-19 vaccine supply shortages are causing concerns about compromised immunity in some countries as the interval between the first and second dose becomes longer. Conversely, countries with no supply constraints are considering administering a third dose. We assessed the persistence of immunogenicity after a single dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), immunity after an extended interval (44–45 weeks) between the first and second dose, and response to a third dose as a booster given 28–38 weeks after the second dose. Methods In this substudy, volunteers aged 18–55 years who were enrolled in the phase 1/2 (COV001) controlled trial in the UK and had received either a single dose or two doses of 5 × 1010 viral particles were invited back for vaccination. Here we report the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of a delayed second dose (44–45 weeks after first dose) or a third dose of the vaccine (28–38 weeks after second dose). Data from volunteers aged 18–55 years who were enrolled in either the phase 1/2 (COV001) or phase 2/3 (COV002), single-blinded, randomised controlled trials of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and who had previously received a single dose or two doses of 5 × 1010 viral particles are used for comparison purposes. COV001 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and COV002 is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137, and both are continuing but not recruiting. Findings Between March 11 and 21, 2021, 90 participants were enrolled in the third-dose boost substudy, of whom 80 (89%) were assessable for reactogenicity, 75 (83%) were assessable for evaluation of antibodies, and 15 (17%) were assessable for T-cells responses. The two-dose cohort comprised 321 participants who had reactogenicity data (with prime-boost interval of 8–12 weeks: 267 [83%] of 321; 15–25 weeks: 24 [7%]; or 44–45 weeks: 30 [9%]) and 261 who had immunogenicity data (interval of 8–12 weeks: 115 [44%] of 261; 15–25 weeks: 116 [44%]; and 44–45 weeks: 30 [11%]). 480 participants from the single-dose cohort were assessable for immunogenicity up to 44–45 weeks after vaccination. Antibody titres after a single dose measured approximately 320 days after vaccination remained higher than the titres measured at baseline (geometric mean titre of 66·00 ELISA units [EUs; 95% CI 47·83–91·08] vs 1·75 EUs [1·60–1·93]). 32 participants received a late second dose of vaccine 44–45 weeks after the first dose, of whom 30 were included in immunogenicity and reactogenicity analyses. Antibody titres were higher 28 days after vaccination in those with a longer interval between first and second dose than for those with a short interval (median total IgG titre: 923 EUs [IQR 525–1764] with an 8–12 week interval; 1860 EUs [917–4934] with a 15–25 week interval; and 3738 EUs [1824–6625] with a 44–45 week interval). Among participants who received a third dose of vaccine, antibody titres (measured in 73 [81%] participants for whom samples were available) were significantly higher 28 days after a third dose (median total IgG titre: 3746 EUs [IQR 2047–6420]) than 28 days after a second dose (median 1792 EUs [IQR 899–4634]; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·0043). T-cell responses were also boosted after a third dose (median response increased from 200 spot forming units [SFUs] per million peripheral blood mononuclear cells [PBMCs; IQR 127–389] immediately before the third dose to 399 SFUs per milion PBMCs [314–662] by day 28 after the third dose; Wilcoxon signed rank test p=0·012). Reactogenicity after a late second dose or a third dose was lower than reactogenicity after a first dose. Interpretation An extended interval before the second dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 leads to increased antibody titres. A third dose of ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 induces antibodies to a level that correlates with high efficacy after second dose and boosts T-cell responses. Funding UK Research and Innovation, Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, National Institute for Health Research Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences Innovation Fund for Medical Science, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, AstraZeneca, and Wellcome.

Intestinal perforation is one of the most dangerous complications of typhoid fever and demands urgent hospitalization, diagnosis, and surgical management to reduce morbidity and prevent mortality. Here, we report a case of typhoidal intestinal perforation in a 19 year-old young man detected by passive surveillance during a cluster-randomized trial with Vi-tetanus toxoid conjugate vaccine (Typhoid Vaccine Acceleration Consortium: TyVAC) in an urban slum area in Mirpur, Dhaka, Bangladesh. The patient presented with a high-grade fever, lower abdominal pain, and vomiting and was admitted to a healthcare facility. Physical examination and preoperative investigations of the patient suggested a presumptive diagnosis of intestinal perforation, and the patient was transferred to a tertiary-level hospital for surgical management. A positive blood culture, intraoperative findings, and histopathology of an intestinal biopsy confirmed ileal perforation due to typhoid fever. This case report highlights the need for prompt diagnosis and appropriate pre- and postoperative management of patients who appear with the symptoms of typhoidal intestinal perforation. This report further demonstrates the importance of systematic surveillance and proper evaluation to determine the true incidence rate of typhoid fever and intestinal perforation in Bangladesh.

In human challenge trials, volunteers are deliberately infected with a pathogen to accelerate vaccine development and answer key scientific questions. In the U.S., preparations for challenge trials with the novel coronavirus are complete, and in the U.K., challenge trials have recently begun. However, ethical concerns have been raised about the potential for invalid consent or exploitation. These concerns largely reflect worries that challenge trial volunteers may be unusually risk-seeking or too economically vulnerable to refuse the payments these trials provide, rather than being motivated primarily by altruistic goals. We conducted the first large-scale survey of intended human challenge trial volunteers and found that SARS-CoV-2 challenge trial volunteers exhibit high levels of altruistic motivations without any special indication of poor risk perception or economic vulnerability. Findings indicate that challenge trials with the novel coronavirus can attract volunteers with background conditions, attitudes, and motivations that should allay key ethical concerns.

Background A new variant of SARS-CoV-2, B.1.1.7, emerged as the dominant cause of COVID-19 disease in the UK from November, 2020. We report a post-hoc analysis of the efficacy of the adenoviral vector vaccine, ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AZD1222), against this variant. Methods Volunteers (aged ≥18 years) who were enrolled in phase 2/3 vaccine efficacy studies in the UK, and who were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 or a meningococcal conjugate control (MenACWY) vaccine, provided upper airway swabs on a weekly basis and also if they developed symptoms of COVID-19 disease (a cough, a fever of 37·8°C or higher, shortness of breath, anosmia, or ageusia). Swabs were tested by nucleic acid amplification test (NAAT) for SARS-CoV-2 and positive samples were sequenced through the COVID-19 Genomics UK consortium. Neutralising antibody responses were measured using a live-virus microneutralisation assay against the B.1.1.7 lineage and a canonical non-B.1.1.7 lineage (Victoria). The efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a NAAT positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to vaccine received. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 − relative risk (ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vs MenACWY groups) derived from a robust Poisson regression model. This study is continuing and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04400838, and ISRCTN, 15281137. Findings Participants in efficacy cohorts were recruited between May 31 and Nov 13, 2020, and received booster doses between Aug 3 and Dec 30, 2020. Of 8534 participants in the primary efficacy cohort, 6636 (78%) were aged 18–55 years and 5065 (59%) were female. Between Oct 1, 2020, and Jan 14, 2021, 520 participants developed SARS-CoV-2 infection. 1466 NAAT positive nose and throat swabs were collected from these participants during the trial. Of these, 401 swabs from 311 participants were successfully sequenced. Laboratory virus neutralisation activity by vaccine-induced antibodies was lower against the B.1.1.7 variant than against the Victoria lineage (geometric mean ratio 8·9, 95% CI 7·2–11·0). Clinical vaccine efficacy against symptomatic NAAT positive infection was 70·4% (95% CI 43·6–84·5) for B.1.1.7 and 81·5% (67·9–89·4) for non-B.1.1.7 lineages. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 showed reduced neutralisation activity against the B.1.1.7 variant compared with a non-B.1.1.7 variant in vitro, but the vaccine showed efficacy against the B.1.1.7 variant of SARS-CoV-2. Funding UK Research and Innovation, National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midlands NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

To prepare for potential human infection challenge studies (HICS) involving SARS-CoV-2, we convened a multidisciplinary working group to address ethical questions regarding whether and how much SARS-CoV-2 HICS participants should be paid. Because the goals of paying HICS participants, as well as the relevant ethical concerns, are the same as those arising for other types of clinical research, the same basic framework for ethical payment can apply. This framework divides payment into reimbursement, compensation, and incentives, focusing on fairness and promoting adequate recruitment and retention as counterweights to concerns about undue inducement. Within the basic framework, several factors are especially salient for HICS, and for SARS-CoV-2 HICS in particular, including the nature of participant confinement, anticipated discomfort, risks and uncertainty, participant motivations, and trust. These factors are reflected in a payment worksheet created to help sponsors, researchers, and ethics reviewers systematically develop and assess ethically justifiable payment amounts.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. \ud \ud \ud METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. \ud \ud \ud FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. \ud \ud \ud INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. \ud \ud \ud FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.

Background: Rotavirus (RoV) remains the leading cause of acute gastroenteritis in infants and children aged under five years in both high- and low-middle-income countries (LMICs). In LMICs, RoV infections are associated with substantial mortality. Two RoV vaccines (Rotarix and Rotateq) are widely available for use in infants, both of which have been shown to be highly efficacious in Europe and North America. However, for unknown reasons, these RoV vaccines have markedly lower efficacy in LMICs. We hypothesize that poor RoV vaccine efficacy across in certain regions may be associated with genetic heritability or gene expression in the human host. Methods/design: We designed an open-label single-arm interventional trial with the Rotarix RoV vaccine to identify genetic and transcriptomic markers associated with generating a protective immune response against RoV. Overall, 1,000 infants will be recruited prior to Expanded Program on Immunization (EPI) vaccinations at two months of age and vaccinated with oral Rotarix vaccine at two and three months, after which the infants will be followed-up for diarrheal disease until 18 months of age. Blood sampling for genetics, transcriptomics, and immunological analysis will be conducted before each Rotarix vaccination, 2-3 days post-vaccination, and at each follow-up visit (i.e. 6, 12 and 18 months of age). Stool samples will be collected during each diarrheal episode to identify RoV infection. The primary outcome will be Rotarix vaccine failure events (i.e. symptomatic RoV infection despite vaccination), secondary outcomes will be antibody responses and genotypic characterization of the infection virus in Rotarix failure events. Discussion: This study will be the largest and best powered study of its kind to be conducted to date in infants, and will be critical for our understanding of RoV immunity, human genetics in the Vietnam population, and mechanisms determining RoV vaccine-mediated protection. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03587389. Registered on 16 July 2018.

Background: Diarrhoeal disease remains a common cause of illness and death in children Shigella spp. causing bacillary dysentery is a leading cause of moderate-to-severe diarrhoea, particularly in low and middle-income countries. In Southeast Asia, S. sonnei predominates and infections are frequently resistant to first-line treatment with the fluoroquinolone, ciprofloxacin. While resistance to all antimicrobials is increasing, there may be theoretical and clinical benefits to prioritizing treatment of bacillary dysentery with the azalide, azithromycin. In this study we aim to measure the efficacy of treatment with azithromycin compared with ciprofloxacin, the current standard of care, for the treatment of children with bacillary dysentery. Methods and analysis: We will perform a multicentre, open-label, randomized controlled trial of two therapeutic options for the antimicrobial treatment of children hospitalised with dysentery. Children (6–60 months of age) presenting with symptoms and signs of dysentery at Children’s Hospital 2 in Ho Chi Minh City will be randomised (1:1) to treatment with either oral ciprofloxacin (15mg/kg/twice daily for 3 days, standard-of-care) or oral azithromycin (10mg/kg/daily for 3 days). The primary endpoint will be the proportion of treatment failure (defined by clinical and microbiological parameters) by day 28 (+3 days) and will be compared between study arms by logistic regression modelling using treatment allocation as the main variable. Ethics and dissemination: The study protocol (version 1.2 dated 27th December 2018) has been approved by the Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee (47–18) and the ethical review boards of Children's Hospital 2 (1341/NĐ2-CĐT). The study has also been approved by the Vietnamese Ministry of Health (5044/QĐ-BYT). Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03854929 (February 26th 2019).

Enteric fever is a systemic infection caused by Salmonella Typhi or Paratyphi A. In many endemic areas, these serovars co-circulate and can cause multiple infection-episodes in childhood. Prior exposure is thought to confer partial, but incomplete, protection against subsequent attacks of enteric fever. Empirical data to support this hypothesis are limited, and there are few studies describing the occurrence of heterologous-protection between these closely related serovars. We performed a challenge-re-challenge study using a controlled human infection model (CHIM) to investigate the extent of infection-derived immunity to Salmonella Typhi or Paratyphi A infection. We recruited healthy volunteers into two groups: naïve volunteers with no prior exposure to Salmonella Typhi/Paratyphi A and volunteers previously-exposed to Salmonella Typhi or Paratyphi A in earlier CHIM studies. Within each group, participants were randomised 1:1 to oral challenge with either Salmonella Typhi (104 CFU) or Paratyphi A (103 CFU). The primary objective was to compare the attack rate between naïve and previously challenged individuals, defined as the proportion of participants per group meeting the diagnostic criteria of temperature of ≥38°C persisting for ≥12 hours and/or S. Typhi/Paratyphi bacteraemia up to day 14 post challenge. The attack-rate in participants who underwent homologous re-challenge with Salmonella Typhi was reduced compared with challenged naïve controls, although this reduction was not statistically significant (12/27[44%] vs. 12/19[63%]; Relative risk 0.70; 95% CI 0.41–1.21; p = 0.24). Homologous re-challenge with Salmonella Paratyphi A also resulted in a lower attack-rate than was seen in challenged naïve controls (3/12[25%] vs. 10/18[56%]; RR0.45; 95% CI 0.16–1.30; p = 0.14). Evidence of protection was supported by a post hoc analysis in which previous exposure was associated with an approximately 36% and 57% reduced risk of typhoid or paratyphoid disease respectively on re-challenge. Individuals who did not develop enteric fever on primary exposure were significantly more likely to be protected on re-challenge, compared with individuals who developed disease on primary exposure. Heterologous re-challenge with Salmonella Typhi or Salmonella Paratyphi A was not associated with a reduced attack rate following challenge. Within the context of the model, prior exposure was not associated with reduced disease severity, altered microbiological profile or boosting of humoral immune responses. We conclude that prior Salmonella Typhi and Paratyphi A exposure may confer partial but incomplete protection against subsequent infection, but with a comparable clinical and microbiological phenotype. There is no demonstrable cross-protection between these serovars, consistent with the co-circulation of Salmonella Typhi and Paratyphi A. Collectively, these data are consistent with surveillance and modelling studies that indicate multiple infections can occur in high transmission settings, supporting the need for vaccines to reduce the burden of disease in childhood and achieve disease control. Trial registration NCT02192008; clinicaltrials.gov., Author summary In this study, we assessed whether previous infection with the bacteria Salmonella Typhi and Salmonella Paratyphi protected against second infections. Healthy volunteers who had been previously infected with these bacteria in earlier human challenge studies were challenged for a second time. We compared the rate of infection in the re-challenge group with healthy volunteers who were challenged for the first time. We found that previous infection was associated with a lower rate of second infections and longer time to disease but was not associated with complete protection from disease. Some individuals appeared to be more resistant to developing infection on both occasions. Previous infection with Salmonella Typhi did not appear to protect against later infection with Salmonella Paratyphi and vice-versa. Antibody responses and clinical symptoms were similar in between first and second infections. These results and future studies could help us to better understand immunity to these bacteria and help the development of new vaccines for Salmonella Typhi and Paratyphi.

Enteric (typhoid) fever remains a problem in low- and middle-income countries that lack the infrastructure to maintain sanitation and where inadequate diagnostic methods have restricted our ability to identify and control the disease more effectively. As we move into a period of potential disease elimination through the introduction of typhoid conjugate vaccine (TCV), we again need to reconsider the role of typhoid diagnostics in how they can aid in facilitating disease control. Recent technological advances, including serology, transcriptomics, and metabolomics, have provided new insights into how we can detect signatures of invasive Salmonella organisms interacting with the host during infection. Many of these new techniques exhibit potential that could be further explored with the aim of creating a new enteric fever diagnostic to work in conjunction with TCV. We need a sustained effort within the enteric fever field to accelerate, validate, and ultimately introduce 1 (or more) of these methods to facilitate the disease control initiative. The window of opportunity is still open, but we need to recognize the need for communication with other research areas and commercial organizations to assist in the progression of these diagnostic approaches. The elimination of enteric fever is now becoming a real possibility, but new diagnostics need to be part of the equation and factored into future calculations for disease control.

Recently, human challenge trials (HCTs) have been proposed as a means to accelerate the development of an effective SARS-CoV-2 vaccine. In this paper, we discuss the potential role for such studies in the current COVID-19 pandemic. First, we present three scenarios in which HCTs could be useful: evaluating efficacy, converging on correlates of protection, and improving understanding of pathogenesis and the human immune response. We go on to outline the practical limitations of HCTs in these scenarios. We conclude that, while currently limited in their application, there are scenarios in which HCTs would be vastly beneficial and, thus, the option of using HCTs to accelerate COVID-19 vaccine development should be preserved. To this end, we recommend an immediate, coordinated effort by all stakeholders to (1) establish ethical and practical guidelines for the use of HCTs for COVID-19; (2) take the first steps toward an HCT, including preparing challenge virus under GMP and making preliminary logistical arrangements; and (3) commit to periodically re-evaluating the utility of HCTs amid the evolving pandemic.

Development of an effective vaccine is the clearest path to controlling the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. To accelerate vaccine development, some researchers are pursuing, and thousands of people have expressed interest in participating in, controlled human infection studies (CHIs) with severe acute respiratory syndrome–coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (1, 2). In CHIs, a small number of participants are deliberately exposed to a pathogen to study infection and gather preliminary efficacy data on experimental vaccines or treatments. We have been developing a comprehensive, state-of-the-art ethical framework for CHIs that emphasizes their social value as fundamental to justifying these studies. The ethics of CHIs in general are underexplored (3, 4), and ethical examinations of SARS-CoV-2 CHIs have largely focused on whether the risks are acceptable and participants could give valid informed consent (1). The high social value of such CHIs has generally been assumed. Based on our framework, we agree on the ethical conditions for conducting SARS-CoV-2 CHIs (see the table). We differ on whether the social value of such CHIs is sufficient to justify the risks at present, given uncertainty about both in a rapidly evolving situation; yet we see none of our disagreements as insurmountable. We provide ethical guidance for research sponsors, communities, participants, and the essential independent reviewers considering SARS-CoV-2 CHIs.

To prepare for potential human infection challenge studies (HICS) involving SARS-CoV-2, this report offers an expert analysis of ethical approaches to paying research participants in these studies, as well as HICS more broadly. The report first provides an overarching ethical framework for research payment that divides payment into reimbursement, compensation, and incentive, focusing on fairness and promoting adequate recruitment and retention as counterweights to ethical concerns about undue inducement. It then describes variables relevant to applying this framework to any type of study, including the prospect of direct medical benefit, early participant withdrawal, study setting and location, pandemic circumstances, study budget, and participant perspectives. We conclude that there is no need for a unique payment framework specific to HICS or SARS-CoV-2 HICS, but that there may be features of particular relevance to ethical payment for these studies. Participants have varied motivations for enrolling in HICS, including financial considerations, altruism, and other interests, but undue inducement does not seem to be a significant problem based on available evidence. Payment in these studies should reflect the nature of participant confinement, anticipated discomfort from induced infection, risks and uncertainty, participant motivations, and the need to recruit from certain populations, as relevant. Where HICS involve significant risks and highly contingent social value, special review confirming the ethical permissibility of these studies can help promote confidence in the ethical permissibility of offers of payment to participate in them. We do not propose specific payment amounts for potential SARS-CoV-2 HICS, as these will be highly variable based on the relevant factors described in the report. Instead, we note that it is reasonable to start from payments offered in other similar studies, while adopting a systematic approach based on the ethical framework herein, as reflected in a pragmatic payment worksheet describing goals, coverage, factors to consider, and potential benchmarks.

Objective There are no vaccines for most of the major invasive Salmonella strains causing severe infection in humans. We evaluated the specificity of adaptive T memory cell responses generated after Salmonella Typhi exposure in humans against other major invasive Salmonella strains sharing capacity for dissemination. Methods T memory cells from eleven volunteers who underwent controlled oral challenge with wt S. Typhi were characterised by flow cytometry for cross‐reactive cellular cytokine/chemokine effector responses or evidence of degranulation upon stimulation with autologous B‐lymphoblastoid cells infected with either S. Typhi, Salmonella Paratyphi A (PA), S. Paratyphi B (PB) or an invasive nontyphoidal Salmonella strain of the S. Typhimurium serovar (iNTSTy). Results Blood T‐cell effector memory (TEM) responses after exposure to S. Typhi in humans evolve late, peaking weeks after infection in most volunteers. Induced multifunctional CD4+ Th1 and CD8+ TEM cells elicited after S. Typhi challenge were cross‐reactive with PA, PB and iNTSTy. The magnitude of multifunctional CD4+ TEM cell responses to S. Typhi correlated with induction of cross‐reactive multifunctional CD8+ TEM cells against PA, PB and iNTSTy. Highly multifunctional subsets and T central memory and T effector memory cells that re‐express CD45 (TEMRA) demonstrated less heterologous T‐cell cross‐reactivity, and multifunctional Th17 elicited after S. Typhi challenge was not cross‐reactive against other invasive Salmonella. Conclusion Gaps in cross‐reactive immune effector functions in human T‐cell memory compartments were highly dependent on invasive Salmonella strain, underscoring the importance of strain‐dependent vaccination in the design of T‐cell‐based vaccines for invasive Salmonella., Vaccines are lacking against several of the major causes of invasive Salmonella disease, such as invasive nontyphoidal Salmonella and S. Paratyphi A. These studies demonstrate that T memory cell effector responses generated after human wt Salmonella Typhi mucosal infection are multifunctional and cross‐reactive against S. Paratyphi A, S. Paratyphi B and an invasive nontyphoidal Salmonella Typhimurium strain, yet the specific functional characteristics of the memory T‐cell responses are significantly impacted by serovar. These data provide a rationale for strain‐specific vaccination against invasive Salmonella for next‐generation T‐cell‐based vaccines.

Background Hepatitis C infection is a major public health concern in low- and middle-income countries where an estimated 71.1 million individuals are living with chronic infection. The World Health Organization (WHO) has recently released new guidance for hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment programs, which include improving the access to new direct-acting antiviral agents. In Vietnam, a highly populated middle-income country, the seroprevalence of HCV infection is approximately 4% and multiple genotypes co-circulate in the general population. Here we review what is currently known regarding the epidemiology of HCV in Vietnam and outline options for reducing the significant burden of morbidity and mortality in our setting. Methods We performed a systematic review of the currently available literature to evaluate what has been achieved to date with efforts to control HCV infection in Vietnam. Results This search retrieved few publications specific to Vietnam indicating a significant gap in baseline epidemiological and public health data. Key knowledge gaps identified included an understanding of the prevalence in specific high-risk groups, characterization of circulating HCV genotypes in the population and likely response to treatment, and the extent to which HCV treatment is available, accessed and utilized. Conclusions We conclude that there is an urgent need to perform up to date assessments of HCV disease burden in Vietnam, especially in high-risk groups, in whom incidence is high and cross infection with multiple genotypes is likely to be frequent. Coordinating renewed surveillance measures with forthcoming HCV treatment studies should initiate the traction required to achieve the WHO goal of eliminating HCV as a public health threat by 2030, at least in this region.

The diagnosis of typhoid fever is a challenge. Aiming to develop a typhoid diagnostic we measured antibody responses against Salmonella Typhi (S. Typhi) protein antigens and the Vi polysaccharide in a cohort of Bangladeshi febrile patients. IgM against 12 purified antigens and the Vi polysaccharide was measured by ELISA in plasma from patients with confirmed typhoid fever (n = 32), other confirmed infections (n = 17), and healthy controls (n = 40). ELISAs with the most specific antigens were performed on plasma from 243 patients with undiagnosed febrile disease. IgM against the S. Typhi protein antigens correlated with each other (rho > 0.8), but not against Vi (rho 0.85, respectively. Applying a dynamic cut-off to patients with undiagnosed febrile disease suggested that 34-58% had an IgM response indicative of typhoid. We evaluated the diagnostic potential of several S. Typhi antigens; our assays give good sensitivity and specificity, but require further assessment in differing patient populations. [Abstract copyright: Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.]

Misdiagnosis of enteric fever is a major global health problem resulting in patient mismanagement, antimicrobial misuse and inaccurate disease burden estimates. Applying a machine-learning algorithm to host gene expression profiles, we identified a diagnostic signature which could accurately distinguish culture-confirmed enteric fever cases from other febrile illnesses (AUROC

New diagnostic tests for the etiology of childhood pneumonia are needed. We evaluated the antibody-in-lymphocyte supernatant (ALS) assay to detect immunoglobulin (Ig) G secretion from ex vivo peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) culture, as a potential diagnostic test for pneumococcal pneumonia. We enrolled 348 children with pneumonia admitted to Patan Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal between December 2015 and September 2016. PBMCs sampled from participants were incubated for 48 h before harvesting of cell culture supernatant (ALS). We used a fluorescence-based multiplexed immunoassay to measure the concentration of IgG in ALS against five conserved pneumococcal protein antigens. Of children with pneumonia, 68 had a confirmed etiological diagnosis: 12 children had pneumococcal pneumonia (defined as blood or pleural fluid culture-confirmed; or plasma CRP concentration ≥60 mg/l and nasopharyngeal carriage of serotype 1 pneumococci), and 56 children had non-pneumococcal pneumonia. Children with non-pneumococcal pneumonia had either a bacterial pathogen isolated from blood (six children); or C-reactive protein

Misdiagnosis of enteric fever is a major global health problem, resulting in patient mismanagement, antimicrobial misuse and inaccurate disease burden estimates. Applying a machine learning algorithm to host gene expression profiles, we identified a diagnostic signature, which could distinguish culture‐confirmed enteric fever cases from other febrile illnesses (area under receiver operating characteristic curve > 95%). Applying this signature to a culture‐negative suspected enteric fever cohort in Nepal identified a further 12.6% as likely true cases. Our analysis highlights the power of data‐driven approaches to identify host response patterns for the diagnosis of febrile illnesses. Expression signatures were validated using qPCR, highlighting their utility as PCR‐based diagnostics for use in endemic settings.

20-Hydroxyeicosatetraenoic acid (20-HETE) is formed by the ω-hydroxylation of arachidonic acid by cytochrome P450 4A and 4F enzymes, and it induces angiogenic responses in vivo. To test the hypothesis that 20-HETE increases endothelial cell (EC) proliferation via vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), we studied the effects of WIT003 [20-hydroxyeicosa-5(Z),14(Z)-dienoic acid], a 20-HETE analog on human macrovascular or microvascular EC. WIT003, as well as pure 20-HETE, stimulated EC proliferation by ∼40%. These proliferative effects were accompanied by increased VEGF expression and release that were observed as early as 4 h after 20-HETE agonist addition. This was accompanied by increased phosphorylation of the VEGF receptor 2. The proliferative effects of 20-HETE were markedly inhibited by a VEGF-neutralizing antibody. Polyethylene glycol-superoxide dismutase (PEG-SOD) markedly inhibited both the increases in VEGF expression and the proliferative effects of 20-HETE. In contrast, administration of the NAD(P)H oxidase inhibitor apocynin had no effect to the proliferative response to 20-HETE. The 20-HETE agonist markedly increased superoxide formation as reflected by an increase in dihydroethidium staining of EC, and this increase was inhibited by PEG-SOD but not by apocynin. 20-HETE also increased the phosphorylation of p42/p44 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) in EC, whereas an inhibitor of MAPK [U0126, 1,4-diamino-2,3-dicyano-1,4-bis(2-aminophenylthio)butadiene] suppressed the proliferative and the VEGF changes but not the pro-oxidant effects of 20-HETE. These data suggest that 20-HETE stimulates superoxide formation by pathways other than apocynin-sensitive NAD(P)H oxidase, thereby activating MAPK and then enhancing VEGF synthesis that drives EC proliferation. Thus, 20-HETE may be involved in the regulation of EC functions, such as angiogenesis.

Since the 18th century a wealth of knowledge regarding infectious disease pathogenesis, prevention, and treatment has been accumulated from findings of infection challenges in human beings. Partly because of improvements to ethical and regulatory guidance, human challenge studies-involving the deliberate exposure of participants to infectious substances-have had a resurgence in popularity in the past few years, in particular for the assessment of vaccines. To provide an overview of the potential use of challenge models, we present historical reports and contemporary views from experts in this type of research. A range of challenge models and practical approaches to generate important data exist and are used to expedite vaccine and therapeutic development and to support public health modelling and interventions. Although human challenge studies provide a unique opportunity to address complex research questions, participant and investigator safety is paramount. To increase the collaborative effort and future success of this area of research, we recommend the development of consensus frameworks and sharing of best practices between investigators. Furthermore, standardisation of challenge procedures and regulatory guidance will help with the feasibility for using challenge models in clinical testing of new disease intervention strategies.

Background Salmonella serovars Typhi (S. Typhi) and Paratyphi A (S. Paratyphi A), the causative agents of enteric fever, have been routinely isolated organisms from the blood of febrile patients in the Kathmandu Valley since the early 1990s. Susceptibility against commonly used antimicrobials for treating enteric fever has gradually changed throughout South Asia since this time, posing serious treatment challenges. Here, we aimed to longitudinally describe trends in the isolation of Salmonella enterica and assess changes in their antimicrobial susceptibility in Kathmandu over a 23-year period. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of standardised microbiological data from April 1992 to December 2014 at a single healthcare facility in Kathmandu, examining time trends of Salmonella-associated bacteraemia and the corresponding antimicrobial susceptibility profiles of the isolated organisms. Results Over 23 years there were 30,353 positive blood cultures. Salmonella enterica accounted for 65.4% (19,857/30,353) of all the bacteria positive blood cultures. S. Typhi and S. Paratyphi A were the dominant serovars, constituting 68.5% (13,592/19,857) and 30.5% (6,057/19,857) of all isolated Salmonellae. We observed (i) a peak in the number of Salmonella-positive cultures in 2002, a year of heavy rainfall and flooding in the Kathmandu Valley, followed by a decline toward pre-flood baseline by 2014, (ii) an increase in the proportion of S. Paratyphi in all Salmonella-positive cultures between 1992 and 2014, (iii) a decrease in the prevalence of MDR for both S. Typhi and S. Paratyphi, and (iv) a recent increase in fluoroquinolone non-susceptibility in both S. Typhi and S. Paratyphi isolates. Conclusions Our work describes significant changes in the epidemiology of Salmonella enterica in the Kathmandu Valley during the last quarter of a century. We highlight the need to examine current treatment protocols for enteric fever and suggest a change from fluoroquinolone monotherapy to combination therapies of macrolides or cephalosporins along with older first-line antimicrobials that have regained their efficacy., Author summary Aiming to understand the epidemiology and changing patterns of the Salmonella enterica serovars Typhi and Paratyphi A within a single healthcare facility in Kathmandu, we retrospectively analysed 23 years of microbiological blood culture data. From 224,741 blood cultures performed, 30,353 were confirmed to be positive for pathogenic bacteria, of which Salmonella enterica accounted for 65.4% (19,857/30,353) of all the bacteria positive blood cultures. S. Typhi and S. Paratyphi A were the dominant serovars, constituting 68.5% (13,592/19,857) and 30.5% (6,057/19,857) of all isolated Salmonellae. We observed that S. Typhi and S. Paratyphi A remained the leading cause of bacterial febrile illness since the 1990s. Additionally, antimicrobial resistance is a major public health challenge, and resistance against the antimicrobials most commonly used for treating enteric fever has developed over the last two decades. In this analysis we were able to document a decrease in the number of Salmonella-positive cultures from 2002 to 2014 and an increase in the proportion of S. Paratyphi A in all Salmonella-positive cultures between 1992 and 2014. Concurrently, we also observed a decrease in MDR for S. Typhi and S. Paratyphi and a recent increase in fluoroquinolone non-susceptibility in both serovars.

Introduction Invasive infections caused by Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi and Paratyphi A are estimated to account for 12–27 million febrile illness episodes worldwide annually. Determining the true burden of typhoidal Salmonellae infections is hindered by lack of population-based studies and adequate laboratory diagnostics. The Strategic Typhoid alliance across Africa and Asia study takes a systematic approach to measuring the age-stratified burden of clinical and subclinical disease caused by typhoidal Salmonellae infections at three high-incidence urban sites in Africa and Asia. We aim to explore the natural history of Salmonella transmission in endemic settings, addressing key uncertainties relating to the epidemiology of enteric fever identified through mathematical models, and enabling optimisation of vaccine strategies. Methods/design Using census-defined denominator populations of ≥100 000 individuals at sites in Malawi, Bangladesh and Nepal, the primary outcome is to characterise the burden of enteric fever in these populations over a 24-month period. During passive surveillance, clinical and household data, and laboratory samples will be collected from febrile individuals. In parallel, healthcare utilisation and water, sanitation and hygiene surveys will be performed to characterise healthcare-seeking behaviour and assess potential routes of transmission. The rates of both undiagnosed and subclinical exposure to typhoidal Salmonellae (seroincidence), identification of chronic carriage and population seroprevalence of typhoid infection will be assessed through age-stratified serosurveys performed at each site. Secondary attack rates will be estimated among household contacts of acute enteric fever cases and possible chronic carriers. Ethics and dissemination This protocol has been ethically approved by the Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee, the icddr,b Institutional Review Board, the Malawian National Health Sciences Research Committee and College of Medicine Research Ethics Committee and Nepal Health Research Council. The study is being conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and Good Clinical Practice. Informed consent was obtained before study enrolment. Results will be submitted to international peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. Trial registration number ISRCTN 12131979. Ethics references Oxford (Oxford Tropical Research Ethics Committee 39-15). Bangladesh (icddr,b Institutional Review Board PR-15119). Malawi (National Health Sciences Research Committee 15/5/1599). Nepal (Nepal Health Research Council 306/2015).

Summary This is the largest collection of enteric fever treatment data. The results, from trials conducted in Nepal since 2005, confirm that fluoroquinolones are failing for enteric fever treatment. The World Health Organization enteric fever treatment guidelines should be modified., Background. Enteric fever, caused by Salmonella Typhi and Salmonella Paratyphi A, is the leading cause of bacterial febrile disease in South Asia. Methods. Individual data from 2092 patients with enteric fever randomized into 4 trials in Kathmandu, Nepal, were pooled. All trials compared gatifloxacin with 1 of the following comparator drugs: cefixime, chloramphenicol, ofloxacin, or ceftriaxone. Treatment outcomes were evaluated according to antimicrobial if S. Typhi/Paratyphi were isolated from blood. We additionally investigated the impact of changing bacterial antimicrobial susceptibility on outcome. Results. Overall, 855 (41%) patients had either S. Typhi (n = 581, 28%) or S. Paratyphi A (n = 274, 13%) cultured from blood. There were 139 (6.6%) treatment failures with 1 death. Except for the last trial with ceftriaxone, the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin was associated with equivalent or better fever clearance times and lower treatment failure rates in comparison to all other antimicrobials. However, we additionally found that the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) against fluoroquinolones have risen significantly since 2005 and were associated with increasing fever clearance times. Notably, all organisms were susceptible to ceftriaxone throughout the study period (2005–2014), and the MICs against azithromycin declined, confirming the utility of these alternative drugs for enteric fever treatment. Conclusion. The World Health Organization and local government health ministries in South Asia still recommend fluoroquinolones for enteric fever. This policy should change based on the evidence provided here. Rapid diagnostics are urgently required given the large numbers of suspected enteric fever patients with a negative culture.