Search

Background: In March, 2016, a flare-up of Ebola virus disease was reported in Guinea, and in response ring vaccination with the unlicensed rVSV-ZEBOV vaccine was introduced under expanded access, the first time that an Ebola vaccine has been used in an outbreak setting outside a clinical trial. Here we describe the safety of rVSV-ZEBOV candidate vaccine and operational feasibility of ring vaccination as a reactive strategy in a resource-limited rural setting.Methods: Approval for expanded access and compassionate use was rapidly sought and obtained from relevant authorities. Vaccination teams and frozen vaccine were flown to the outbreak settings. Rings of contacts and contacts of contacts were defined and eligible individuals, who had given informed consent, were vaccinated and followed up for 21 days under good clinical practice conditions.Findings: Between March 17 and April 21, 2016, 1510 individuals were vaccinated in four rings in Guinea, including 303 individuals aged between 6 years and 17 years and 307 front-line workers. It took 10 days to vaccinate the first participant following the confirmation of the first case of Ebola virus disease. No secondary cases of Ebola virus disease occurred among the vaccinees. Adverse events following vaccination were reported in 47 (17%) 6-17 year olds (all mild) and 412 (36%) adults (individuals older than 18 years; 98% were mild). Children reported fewer arthralgia events than adults (one [<1%] of 303 children vs 81 [7%] of 1207 adults). No severe vaccine-related adverse events were reported.Interpretation: The results show that a ring vaccination strategy can be rapidly and safely implemented at scale in response to Ebola virus disease outbreaks in rural settings.Funding: WHO, Gavi, and the World Food Programme. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Despite the heightened risk of serious influenza during infancy, vaccination is not recommended in infants younger than 6 months. We aimed to assess the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of maternal immunisation with trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine for protection of infants against a first episode of laboratory-confirmed influenza.Methods: We did this prospective, active-controlled, observer-blind, randomised phase 4 trial at six referral centres and community health centres in Bamako, Mali. Third-trimester pregnant women (≥28 weeks' gestation) were randomly assigned (1:1), via a computer-generated, centre-specific list with alternate block sizes of six or 12, to receive either trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine or quadrivalent meningococcal vaccine. Study personnel administering vaccines were not masked to treatment allocation, but allocation was concealed from clinicians, laboratory personnel, and participants. Infants were visited weekly until age 6 months to detect influenza-like illness; laboratory-confirmed influenza diagnosed with RT-PCR. We assessed two coprimary objectives: vaccine efficacy against laboratory-confirmed influenza in infants born to women immunised any time prepartum (intention-to-treat population), and vaccine efficacy in infants born to women immunised at least 14 days prepartum (per-protocol population). The primary outcome was the occurrence of a first case of laboratory-confirmed influenza by age 6 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01430689.Findings: We did this trial from Sept 12, 2011, to Jan 28, 2014. Between Sept 12, 2011, and April 18, 2013, we randomly assigned 4193 women to receive trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (n=2108) or quadrivalent meningococcal vaccine (n=2085). There were 4105 livebirths; 1797 (87%) of 2064 infants in the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine group and 1793 (88%) of 2041 infants in the quadrivalent meningococcal vaccine group were followed up until age 6 months. We recorded 5279 influenza-like illness episodes in 2789 (68%) infants, of which 131 (2%) episodes were laboratory-confirmed influenza. 129 (98%) cases of laboratory-confirmed influenza were first episodes (n=77 in the quadrivalent meningococcal vaccine group vs n=52 in the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine group). In the intention-to-treat population, overall infant vaccine efficacy was 33·1% (95% CI 3·7-53·9); in the per-protocol population, vaccine efficacy was 37·3% (7·6-57·8). Vaccine efficacy remained robust during the first 4 months of follow-up (67·9% [95% CI 35·1-85·3] by intention to treat and 70·2% [35·7-87·6] by per protocol), before diminishing during the fifth month (57·3% [30·6-74·4] and 60·7 [33·8-77·5], respectively). Adverse event rates in women and infants were similar among groups. Pain at the injection site was more common in women given quadrivalent meningococcal vaccine than in those given trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (n=253 vs n=132; p<0·0001), although 354 [92%] reactions were mild. Obstetrical and non-obstetrical serious adverse events were reported in 60 (3%) women in the quadrivalent meningococcal vaccine group and 61 (3%) women in the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine group. Presumed neonatal infection was more common in infants in the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine group than in those in the quadrivalent meningococcal vaccine group (n=60 vs n=37; p=0·02). No serious adverse events were related to vaccination.Interpretation: Vaccination of pregnant women with trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine in Mali-a poorly resourced country with high infant mortality-was technically and logistically feasible and protected infants from laboratory-confirmed influenza for 4 months. With adequate financing to procure the vaccine, implementation will parallel the access to antenatal care and immunisation coverage of pregnant women with tetanus toxoid.Funding: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The 2014 west African Zaire Ebola virus epidemic prompted worldwide partners to accelerate clinical development of replication-defective chimpanzee adenovirus 3 vector vaccine expressing Zaire Ebola virus glycoprotein (ChAd3-EBO-Z). We aimed to investigate the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of ChAd3-EBO-Z in Malian and US adults, and assess the effect of boosting of Malians with modified vaccinia Ankara expressing Zaire Ebola virus glycoprotein and other filovirus antigens (MVA-BN-Filo).Methods: In the phase 1, single-blind, randomised trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in the USA, we recruited adults aged 18-65 years from the University of Maryland medical community and the Baltimore community. In the phase 1b, open-label and double-blind, dose-escalation trial of ChAd3-EBO-Z in Mali, we recruited adults 18-50 years of age from six hospitals and health centres in Bamako (Mali), some of whom were also eligible for a nested, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of MVA-BN-Filo. For randomised segments of the Malian trial and for the US trial, we randomly allocated participants (1:1; block size of six [Malian] or four [US]; ARB produced computer-generated randomisation lists; clinical staff did randomisation) to different single doses of intramuscular immunisation with ChAd3-EBO-Z: Malians received 1 × 10(10) viral particle units (pu), 2·5 × 10(10) pu, 5 × 10(10) pu, or 1 × 10(11) pu; US participants received 1 × 10(10) pu or 1 × 10(11) pu. We randomly allocated Malians in the nested trial (1:1) to receive a single dose of 2 × 10(8) plaque-forming units of MVA-BN-Filo or saline placebo. In the double-blind segments of the Malian trial, investigators, clinical staff, participants, and immunology laboratory staff were masked, but the study pharmacist (MK), vaccine administrator, and study statistician (ARB) were unmasked. In the US trial, investigators were not masked, but participants were. Analyses were per protocol. The primary outcome was safety, measured with occurrence of adverse events for 7 days after vaccination. Both trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT02231866 (US) and NCT02267109 (Malian).Findings: Between Oct 8, 2014, and Feb 16, 2015, we randomly allocated 91 participants in Mali (ten [11%] to 1 × 10(10) pu, 35 [38%] to 2·5 × 10(10) pu, 35 [38%] to 5 × 10(10) pu, and 11 [12%] to 1 × 10(11) pu) and 20 in the USA (ten [50%] to 1 × 10(10) pu and ten [50%] to 1 × 10(11) pu), and boosted 52 Malians with MVA-BN-Filo (27 [52%]) or saline (25 [48%]). We identified no safety concerns with either vaccine: seven (8%) of 91 participants in Mali (five [5%] received 5 × 10(10) and two [2%] received 1 × 10(11) pu) and four (20%) of 20 in the USA (all received 1 × 10(11) pu) given ChAd3-EBO-Z had fever lasting for less than 24 h, and 15 (56%) of 27 Malians boosted with MVA-BN-Filo had injection-site pain or tenderness.Interpretation: 1 × 10(11) pu single-dose ChAd3-EBO-Z could suffice for phase 3 efficacy trials of ring-vaccination containment needing short-term, high-level protection to interrupt transmission. MVA-BN-Filo boosting, although a complex regimen, could confer long-lived protection if needed (eg, for health-care workers).Funding: Wellcome Trust, Medical Research Council UK, Department for International Development UK, National Cancer Institute, Frederick National Laboratory for Cancer Research, Federal Funds from National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]