Abstract
Background The only licensed malaria vaccine, RTS,S/AS01E, confers moderate protection against symptomatic disease. Because many malaria infections are asymptomatic, we conducted a large-scale longitudinal parasite genotyping study of samples from a clinical trial exploring how vaccine dosing regimen affects vaccine efficacy (VE).
Methods 1,500 children aged 5–17 months were randomized to receive four different RTS,S/AS01E regimens or a rabies control vaccine in a phase 2b clinical trial in Ghana and Kenya. We evaluated the time to the first new genotypically detected infection and the total number of new infections during two follow-up periods in over 36K participant specimens. We performed a post hoc analysis of VE based on malaria infection status at first vaccination and force of infection.
Results We observed significant and comparable VE (25–43%, 95% CI union 9–53%) against first new infection for all four RTS,S/AS01E regimens across both follow-up periods (12 and 20 months). Each RTS,S/AS01E regimen significantly reduced the number of new infections in the 20-month follow-up period (control mean 4.1 vs. RTS,S/AS01E mean 2.6–3.0). VE against first new infection was significantly higher in participants who were malaria-infected (68%; 95% CI, 50 to 80%) versus uninfected (37%; 95% CI, 23 to 48%) at the first vaccination (P=0.0053) and in participants experiencing greater force of infection between dose 1 and 3 (P=0.059).
Conclusions All tested dosing regimens blocked some infections to a similar degree. Improved VE in participants infected during vaccination could suggest new strategies for highly efficacious malaria vaccine development and implementation. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03276962)
Competing Interest Statement
LDM received grants from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and KfW/BMBF (German Federal Ministry of Education and Research) through her institution. CKL received a grant from KfW/BMBF (German Federal Ministry of Education and Research) and a grant from Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. DFW acted as a PI on this MAL-095 study funded by a PATH grant paid to Harvard University, which also supported DEN, AME, BLM, SFS, and AK. DFW is also Chair of the MPAG (Malaria Policy Advisory Group) that advises the WHO on all malaria policy. PBG discloses a PATH subaward from Harvard for statistical analysis contributing to salary support for PBG, MJ, and LL. AME, LL, AK,BS, NSH, DB, SAdjei, TA, SA, DA, DKB, PBYB, SE, NF, JG, SKK, KO, AMS, NW, CFO declare no conflict of interest. ML, FR, OO-A are employees of GSK.ML, FR, and OO-A own shares in GSK. The authors declare no other financial and non-financial relationships and activities.
Clinical Trial
NCT03281291
Funding Statement
Funding for this trial and publication was provided by GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA (study sponsor) and by PATH, an international public health organization, through grants awarded to PATH's Center for Vaccine Innovation and Access by the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (the latter administered through the KfW Development Bank). This work was also partially supported by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, NIH, under award R37AI054165 (to PBG).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The Harvard Longwood Campus IRB gave ethical approval for this work.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All sequencing data were submitted to the NCBI Sequence Read Archive (BioProject PRJNA983279) and are available online.
