Literature DB >> 19061928

MALVAC 2008: Measures of efficacy of malaria vaccines in phase 2b and phase 3 trials--scientific, regulatory and public health perspectives.

Vasee S Moorthy1, Zarifah Reed, Peter G Smith.   

Abstract

The WHO Initiative for Vaccine Research and Global Malaria Programme convened a joint scientific forum in June 2008 to discuss scientific, regulatory and public health perspectives on the measurement of efficacy in malaria vaccine field efficacy trials. Participants included clinical trialists, statisticians and epidemiologists from both developed and developing countries, vaccine researchers and developers from academia and industry, and representatives of regulatory agencies. The efficacy of a vaccine against a disease is a summary indication of the extent to which those vaccinated are protected. However, there are several ways of measuring this and for high incidence diseases, such as malaria, in which there is variation in exposure and susceptibility from person to person, the choice of the appropriate measure of efficacy is more complex than is the case for low incidence diseases. There was agreement amongst statisticians at the meeting that basing analyses on "time to event" is the most appropriate method to analyse both incident infection and clinical malaria data from trials. However, policymakers would need to understand that this measure is different from that based on the proportion event-free up to a defined time, which has been used in reporting clinical challenge trials of malaria vaccines. For the assessment of public health impact, data should be reported on all episodes of malaria that a trial subject experiences, not only first episodes, and on duration of efficacy. Further research is required on the analysis of such multiple episode data. It will also be important to examine end-points such as severe malaria and death, though it may be difficult for the latter to be a primary end-point in trials. In order to compare findings in trials, it was suggested that efficacy estimates are reported at different time intervals after vaccination and that data sharing should be enhanced for all malaria vaccine clinical trials. It was appreciated that the epidemiology of malaria is changing in many settings and this may affect the public health benefit of a newly available malaria vaccine, whose likely impact would have to be assessed in the context of multiple other potential control measures. Research into possible interactions between malaria control measures was highlighted as a priority.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19061928     DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2008.11.034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Vaccine        ISSN: 0264-410X            Impact factor:   3.641


  20 in total

1.  Malaria vaccine results face scrutiny.

Authors:  Declan Butler
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2011-10-26       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  A simple approach to the estimation of incidence rate difference.

Authors:  Ying Xu; Y B Cheung; K F Lam; S H Tan; Paul Milligan
Journal:  Am J Epidemiol       Date:  2010-07-06       Impact factor: 4.897

3.  Anti-apical-membrane-antigen-1 antibody is more effective than anti-42-kilodalton-merozoite-surface-protein-1 antibody in inhibiting plasmodium falciparum growth, as determined by the in vitro growth inhibition assay.

Authors:  Kazutoyo Miura; Hong Zhou; Ababacar Diouf; Samuel E Moretz; Michael P Fay; Louis H Miller; Laura B Martin; Mark A Pierce; Ruth D Ellis; Gregory E D Mullen; Carole A Long
Journal:  Clin Vaccine Immunol       Date:  2009-05-13

4.  Prospects for malaria elimination in non-Amazonian regions of Latin America.

Authors:  Sócrates Herrera; Martha Lucia Quiñones; Juan Pablo Quintero; Vladimir Corredor; Douglas O Fuller; Julio Cesar Mateus; Jose E Calzada; Juan B Gutierrez; Alejandro Llanos; Edison Soto; Clara Menendez; Yimin Wu; Pedro Alonso; Gabriel Carrasquilla; Mary Galinski; John C Beier; Myriam Arévalo-Herrera
Journal:  Acta Trop       Date:  2011-07-14       Impact factor: 3.112

5.  Template protocol for clinical trials investigating vaccines--focus on safety elements.

Authors:  Jan Bonhoeffer; Egeruan B Imoukhuede; Grace Aldrovandi; Novilia S Bachtiar; Eng-Soon Chan; Soju Chang; Robert T Chen; Rohini Fernandopulle; Karen L Goldenthal; James D Heffelfinger; Shah Hossain; Indira Jevaji; Ali Khamesipour; Sonali Kochhar; Mamodikoe Makhene; Elissa Malkin; David Nalin; Rebecca Prevots; Ranjan Ramasamy; Sarah Sellers; Johan Vekemans; Kenneth B Walker; Pam Wilson; Virginia Wong; Khalequz Zaman; Ulrich Heininger
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2013-03-13       Impact factor: 3.641

6.  Heterogeneity in malaria exposure and vaccine response: implications for the interpretation of vaccine efficacy trials.

Authors:  Michael T White; Jamie T Griffin; Chris J Drakeley; Azra C Ghani
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 2.979

Review 7.  The march toward malaria vaccines.

Authors:  Stephen L Hoffman; Johan Vekemans; Thomas L Richie; Patrick E Duffy
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2015-08-29       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 8.  The March Toward Malaria Vaccines.

Authors:  Stephen L Hoffman; Johan Vekemans; Thomas L Richie; Patrick E Duffy
Journal:  Am J Prev Med       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 5.043

Review 9.  Guidance on the evaluation of Plasmodium vivax vaccines in populations exposed to natural infection.

Authors:  Ivo Mueller; Vasee S Moorthy; Graham V Brown; Peter G Smith; Pedro Alonso; Blaise Genton
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2009-07-26       Impact factor: 3.641

Review 10.  Clinical trials to estimate the efficacy of preventive interventions against malaria in paediatric populations: a methodological review.

Authors:  Vasee S Moorthy; Zarifah Reed; Peter G Smith
Journal:  Malar J       Date:  2009-02-10       Impact factor: 2.979

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.