Back to Search Start Over

Insights into long-lasting protection induced by RTS,S/AS02A malaria vaccine: further results from a phase IIb trial in Mozambican children.

Authors :
Guinovart C
Aponte JJ
Sacarlal J
Aide P
Leach A
Bassat Q
Macete E
Dobaño C
Lievens M
Loucq C
Ballou WR
Cohen J
Alonso PL
Source :
PloS one [PLoS One] 2009; Vol. 4 (4), pp. e5165. Date of Electronic Publication: 2009 Apr 14.
Publication Year :
2009

Abstract

Background: The pre-erythrocytic malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS02A has shown to confer protection against clinical malaria for at least 21 months in a trial in Mozambican children. Efficacy varied between different endpoints, such as parasitaemia or clinical malaria; however the underlying mechanisms that determine efficacy and its duration remain unknown. We performed a new, exploratory analysis to explore differences in the duration of protection among participants to better understand the protection afforded by RTS,S.<br />Methodology/principal Findings: The study was a Phase IIb double-blind, randomized controlled trial in 2022 children aged 1 to 4 years. The trial was designed with two cohorts to estimate vaccine efficacy against two different endpoints: clinical malaria (cohort 1) and infection (cohort 2). Participants were randomly allocated to receive three doses of RTS,S/AS02A or control vaccines. We did a retrospective, unplanned sub-analysis of cohort 2 data using information collected for safety through the health facility-based passive case detection system. Vaccine efficacy against clinical malaria was estimated over the first six-month surveillance period (double-blind phase) and over the following 12 months (single-blind phase), and analysis was per-protocol. Adjusted vaccine efficacy against first clinical malaria episodes in cohort 2 was of 35.4% (95% CI 4.5-56.3; p = 0.029) over the double-blind phase and of 9.0% (-30.6-36.6; p = 0.609) during the single-blind phase.<br />Conclusions/significance: Contrary to observations in cohort 1, where efficacy against clinical malaria did not wane over time, in cohort 2 the efficacy decreases with time. We hypothesize that this reduced duration of protection is a result of the early diagnosis and treatment of infections in cohort 2 participants, preventing sufficient exposure to asexual-stage antigens. On the other hand, the long-term protection against clinical disease observed in cohort 1 may be a consequence of a prolonged exposure to low-dose blood-stage asexual parasitaemia.<br />Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00197041.

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1932-6203
Volume :
4
Issue :
4
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
PloS one
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
19365567
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0005165