Entity

Time filter

Source Type

Bangalore, India

Hoffman S.L.,Sanaria, Inc. | Vekemans J.,GSK Vaccines | Richie T.L.,Sanaria, Inc. | Duffy P.E.,National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases
American Journal of Preventive Medicine | Year: 2015

In 2013 there were an estimated 584,000 deaths and 198 million clinical illnesses due to malaria, the majority in sub-Saharan Africa. Vaccines would be the ideal addition to the existing armamentarium of anti-malaria tools. However, malaria is caused by parasites, and parasites are much more complex in terms of their biology than the viruses and bacteria for which we have vaccines, passing through multiple stages of development in the human host, each stage expressing hundreds of unique antigens. This complexity makes it more difficult to develop a vaccine for parasites than for viruses and bacteria, since an immune response targeting one stage may not offer protection against a later stage, because different antigens are the targets of protective immunity at different stages. Furthermore, depending on the life cycle stage and whether the parasite is extra- or intra-cellular, antibody and/or cellular immune responses provide protection. It is thus not surprising that there is no vaccine on the market for prevention of malaria, or any human parasitic infection. In fact, no vaccine for any disease with this breadth of targets and immune responses exists. In this limited review, we focus on four approaches to malaria vaccines, (1) a recombinant protein with adjuvant vaccine aimed at Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) pre-erythrocytic stages of the parasite cycle (RTS,S/AS01), (2) whole sporozoite vaccines aimed at Pf pre-erythrocytic stages (PfSPZ Vaccine and PfSPZ-CVac), (3) prime boost vaccines that include recombinant DNA, viruses and bacteria, and protein with adjuvant aimed primarily at Pf pre-erythrocytic, but also asexual erythrocytic stages, and (4) recombinant protein with adjuvant vaccines aimed at Pf and Plasmodium vivax sexual erythrocytic and mosquito stages. We recognize that we are not covering all approaches to malaria vaccine development, or most of the critically important work on development of vaccines against P. vivax, the second most important cause of malaria. Progress during the last few years has been significant, and a first generation malaria candidate vaccine, RTS,S/AS01, is under review by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for its quality, safety and efficacy under article 58, which allows the EMA to give a scientific opinion about products intended exclusively for markets outside of the European Union. However, much work is in progress to optimize malaria vaccines in regard to magnitude and durability of protective efficacy and the financing and practicality of delivery. Thus, we are hopeful that anti-malaria vaccines will soon be important tools in the battle against malaria. © 2015 American Journal of Preventive Medicine and Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. Source


Gomez J.A.,GSK Vaccines Latin America | Lepetic A.,GSK Vaccines Latin America | Demarteau N.,GSK Vaccines
BMC Public Health | Year: 2015

Background: In Chile, significant reductions in cervical cancer incidence and mortality have been observed due to implementation of a well-organized screening program. However, it has been suggested that the inclusion of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for young adolescent women may be the best prospect to further reduce the burden of cervical cancer. This cost-effectiveness study comparing two available HPV vaccines in Chile was performed to support decision making on the implementation of universal HPV vaccination. Methods: The present analysis used an existing static Markov model to assess the effect of screening and vaccination. This analysis includes the epidemiology of low-risk HPV types allowing for the comparison between the two vaccines (HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine and the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine), latest cross-protection data on HPV vaccines, treatment costs for cervical cancer, vaccine costs and 6% discounting per the health economic guideline for Chile. Results: Projected incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICERs) for the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine was 116 United States (US) dollars per quality-adjusted life years (QALY) gained or 147 US dollars per life-years (LY) saved, while the projected ICUR/ICER for the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine was 541 US dollars per QALY gained or 726 US dollars per LY saved. Introduction of any HPV vaccine to the present cervical cancer prevention program of Chile is estimated to be highly cost-effective (below 1X gross domestic product [GDP] per capita, 14278 US dollars). In Chile, the addition of HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine to the existing screening program dominated the addition of HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis results show that the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine is expected to be dominant and cost-saving in 69.3% and 77.6% of the replicates respectively. Conclusions: The findings indicate that the addition of any HPV vaccine to the current cervical screening program of Chile will be advantageous. However, this cost-effectiveness model shows that the HPV-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine dominated the HPV-6/11/16/18 vaccine. Beyond the context of Chile, the data from this modelling exercise may support healthcare policy and decision-making pertaining to introduction of HPV vaccination in similar resource settings in the region. © 2014 Gomez et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. Source


Kaslow D.C.,PATH | Biernaux S.,GSK Vaccines
Vaccine | Year: 2015

The Malaria Vaccine Technology Roadmap calls for a 2015 landmark goal of a first-generation malaria vaccine that has protective efficacy against severe disease and death, lasting longer than one year. This review focuses on product development efforts over the last five years of RTS, S, a pre-erythrocytic, recombinant subunit, adjuvanted, candidate malaria vaccine designed with this goal of a first-generation malaria vaccine in mind. RTS, S recently completed a successful pivotal Phase III safety, efficacy and immunogenicity study. Although vaccine efficacy was found to be modest, a substantial number of cases of clinical malaria were averted over a 3-4 years period, particularly in settings of significant disease burden. European regulators have subsequently adopted a positive opinion under the Article 58 procedure for an indication of active immunization of children aged 6 weeks up to 17 months against malaria caused by Plasmodium falciparum and against hepatitis B. Further evaluations of the benefit, risk, feasibility and cost-effectiveness of RTS, S are now anticipated through policy and financing reviews at the global and national levels. © 2015. Source


Ulmer J.B.,GSK Vaccines | Geall A.J.,Avidity Nanomedicines, Llc
Current Opinion in Immunology | Year: 2016

Nucleic acid-based vaccines are being developed as a means to combine the positive attributes of both live-attenuated and subunit vaccines. Viral vectors and plasmid DNA vaccines have been extensively evaluated in human clinical trials and have been shown to be safe and immunogenic, although none have yet been licensed for human use. Recently, mRNA based vaccines have emerged as an alternative approach. They promise the flexibility of plasmid DNA vaccines, without the need for electroporation, but with enhanced immunogenicity and safety. In addition, they avoid the limitations of anti-vector immunity seen with viral vectors, and can be dosed repeatedly. This review highlights the key papers published over the past few years and summarizes prospects for the near future. © 2016 Source


Lal H.,Global Clinical Research and Development | Cunningham A.L.,Westmead Millennium Institute for Medical Research | Cunningham A.L.,University of Sydney | Godeaux O.,GSK Vaccines | And 12 more authors.
New England Journal of Medicine | Year: 2015

Background: In previous phase 1-2 clinical trials involving older adults, a subunit vaccine containing varicella-zoster virus glycoprotein E and the AS01Badjuvant system (called HZ/su) had a clinically acceptable safety profile and elicited a robust immune response. Methods: We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study in 18 countries to evaluate the efficacy and safety of HZ/su in older adults (≥50 years of age), stratified according to age group (50 to 59, 60 to 69, and ≥70 years). Participants received two intramuscular doses of the vaccine or placebo 2 months apart. The primary objective was to assess the efficacy of the vaccine, as compared with placebo, in reducing the risk of herpes zoster in older adults. Results: A total of 15,411 participants who could be evaluated received either the vaccine (7698 participants) or placebo (7713 participants). During a mean follow-up of 3.2 years, herpes zoster was confirmed in 6 participants in the vaccine group and in 210 participants in the placebo group (incidence rate, 0.3 vs. 9.1 per 1000 person-years) in the modified vaccinated cohort. Overall vaccine efficacy against herpes zoster was 97.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.7 to 99.0; P<0.001). Vaccine efficacy was between 96.6% and 97.9% for all age groups. Solicited reports of injection-site and systemic reactions within 7 days after vaccination were more frequent in the vaccine group. There were solicited or unsolicited reports of grade 3 symptoms in 17.0% of vaccine recipients and 3.2% of placebo recipients. The proportions of participants who had serious adverse events or potential immune-mediated diseases or who died were similar in the two groups. Conclusions: The HZ/su vaccine significantly reduced the risk of herpes zoster in adults who were 50 years of age or older. Vaccine efficacy in adults who were 70 years of age or older was similar to that in the other two age groups. Copyright © 2015 Massachusetts Medical Society. All rights reserved. Source

Discover hidden collaborations