Dataset Information

Simulated impact of RTS,S/AS01 vaccination programs in the context of changing malaria transmission.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: The RTS,S/AS01 pre-erythrocytic malaria vaccine is in phase III clinical trials. It is critical to anticipate where and how it should be implemented if trials are successful. Such planning may be complicated by changing levels of malaria transmission. METHODS/RESULTS: Computer simulations were used to examine RTS,S/AS01 impact, using a vaccine profile based on phase II trial results, and assuming that protection decays only slowly. Settings were simulated in which baseline transmission (in the absence of vaccine) was fixed or varied between 2 and 20 infectious mosquito bites per person per annum (ibpa) over ten years. Four delivery strategies were studied: routine infant immunization (EPI), EPI plus infant catch-up, EPI plus school-based campaigns, and EPI plus mass campaigns. Impacts in changing transmission settings were similar to those in fixed settings. Assuming a persistent effect of vaccination, at 2 ibpa, the vaccine averted approximately 5-7 deaths per 1000 doses of vaccine when delivered via mass campaigns, but the benefit was less at higher transmission levels. EPI, catch-up and school-based strategies averted 2-3 deaths per 1000 doses in settings with 2 ibpa. In settings where transmission was decreasing or increasing, EPI, catch-up and school-based strategies averted approximately 3-4 deaths per 1000 doses. DISCUSSION: Where transmission is changing, it appears to be sufficient to consider simulations of pre-erythrocytic vaccine impact at a range of initial transmission levels. At 2 ibpa, mass campaigns averted the most deaths and reduced transmission, but this requires further study. If delivered via EPI, RTS,S/AS01 could avert approximately 6-11 deaths per 1000 vaccinees in all examined settings, similar to estimates for pneumococcal conjugate vaccine in African infants. These results support RTS,S/AS01 implementation via EPI, for example alongside vector control interventions, providing that the phase III trials provide support for our assumptions about efficacy.

SUBMITTER: Brooks A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3295753 | biostudies-literature | 2012

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Simulated impact of RTS,S/AS01 vaccination programs in the context of changing malaria transmission.

Brooks Alan A Briët Olivier J T OJ Hardy Diggory D Steketee Richard R Smith Thomas A TA

PloS one 20120306 3

<h4>Introduction</h4>The RTS,S/AS01 pre-erythrocytic malaria vaccine is in phase III clinical trials. It is critical to anticipate where and how it should be implemented if trials are successful. Such planning may be complicated by changing levels of malaria transmission.<h4>Methods/results</h4>Computer simulations were used to examine RTS,S/AS01 impact, using a vaccine profile based on phase II trial results, and assuming that protection decays only slowly. Settings were simulated in which base ...[more]

PMID: 22412892

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe RTS,S/AS01 vaccine against Plasmodium falciparum malaria infection completed phase III trials in 2014 and demonstrated efficacy against clinical malaria of approximately 36% over 4 years for a 4-dose schedule in children aged 5-17 months. Pilot vaccine implementation has recently begun in 3 African countries. If the pilots demonstrate both a positive health impact and resolve remaining safety concerns, wider roll-out could be recommended from 2021 onwards. Vaccine demand may, however, outstrip initial supply. We sought to identify where vaccine introduction should be prioritised to maximise public health impact under a range of supply constraints using mathematical modelling.Methods and findingsUsing a mathematical model of P. falciparum malaria transmission and RTS,S vaccine impact, we estimated the clinical cases and deaths averted in children aged 0-5 years in sub-Saharan Africa under 2 scenarios for vaccine coverage (100% and realistic) and 2 scenarios for other interventions (current coverage and World Health Organization [WHO] Global Technical Strategy targets). We used a prioritisation algorithm to identify potential allocative efficiency gains from prioritising vaccine allocation among countries or administrative units to maximise cases or deaths averted. If malaria burden at introduction is similar to current levels-assuming realistic vaccine coverage and country-level prioritisation in areas with parasite prevalence >10%-we estimate that 4.3 million malaria cases (95% credible interval [CrI] 2.8-6.8 million) and 22,000 deaths (95% CrI 11,000-35,000) in children younger than 5 years could be averted annually at a dose constraint of 30 million. This decreases to 3.0 million cases (95% CrI 2.0-4.7 million) and 14,000 deaths (95% CrI 7,000-23,000) at a dose constraint of 20 million, and increases to 6.6 million cases (95% CrI 4.2-10.8 million) and 38,000 deaths (95% CrI 18,000-61,000) at a dose constraint of 60 million. At 100% vaccine coverage, these impact estimates increase to 5.2 million cases (95% CrI 3.5-8.2 million) and 27,000 deaths (95% CrI 14,000-43,000), 3.9 million cases (95% CrI 2.7-6.0 million) and 19,000 deaths (95% CrI 10,000-30,000), and 10.0 million cases (95% CrI 6.7-15.7 million) and 51,000 deaths (95% CrI 25,000-82,000), respectively. Under realistic vaccine coverage, if the vaccine is prioritised sub-nationally, 5.3 million cases (95% CrI 3.5-8.2 million) and 24,000 deaths (95% CrI 12,000-38,000) could be averted at a dose constraint of 30 million. Furthermore, sub-national prioritisation would allow introduction in almost double the number of countries compared to national prioritisation (21 versus 11). If vaccine introduction is prioritised in the 3 pilot countries (Ghana, Kenya, and Malawi), health impact would be reduced, but this effect becomes less substantial (change of <5%) if 50 million or more doses are available. We did not account for within-country variation in vaccine coverage, and the optimisation was based on a single outcome measure, therefore this study should be used to understand overall trends rather than guide country-specific allocation.ConclusionsThese results suggest that the impact of constraints in vaccine supply on the public health impact of the RTS,S malaria vaccine could be reduced by introducing the vaccine at the sub-national level and prioritising countries with the highest malaria incidence.

Project description:A workshop on implementation strategies for the introduction of the RTS,S/AS01 (RTS,S) malaria vaccine in countries with areas of highly seasonal transmission, was held as a hybrid meeting in Dakar, Senegal, and online, 23-25 January 2023. Delegates from Expanded Programmes on Immunization (EPI) and National Malaria Control Programmes (NMCPs) from 13 African countries, and representatives from key stakeholders participated. RTS,S is the first malaria vaccine to be recommended by the World Health Organization (WHO). The recommendation followed pilot implementation of the vaccine in Ghana, Kenya and Malawi, which showed that introduction of the vaccine was highly effective at scale, and was associated with a 30% reduction in hospital admissions with severe malaria in age groups eligible to have received the vaccine and no evidence of the safety signals that had been observed in the phase 3 trial. Clinical trials in Mali and Burkina Faso, showed that in children receiving Seasonal Malaria Chemoprevention (SMC), providing the vaccine just prior to high transmission seasons, matching the period of highest efficacy to the peak transmission season, resulted in substantial reduction in the incidence of clinical malaria and of severe malaria. While SMC has been successfully scaled-up despite the challenges of delivery, there is no established platform for seasonal vaccine delivery and no real-world experience. The objectives of this workshop were, therefore, to share experiences from countries that have introduced the RTS,S vaccine in routine child vaccination programmes, with SMC-implementing countries as they consider malaria vaccine introduction, and to explore implementation strategies in countries with seasonal transmission and where EPI coverage may be low especially in the second year of life. Practical implementation challenges, lessons learned for vaccine introduction, and research questions, towards facilitating the introduction of the RTS,S (and other malaria vaccines) in countries with seasonal malaria transmission were discussed.

Project description:BackgroundRTS,S/AS01 is the first vaccine against malaria to undergo pilot implementation, beginning in 2019 and vaccinating 360,000 children per year in Malawi, Ghana, and Kenya. The four-dose vaccine is given as a primary three-dose series with a fourth dose given approximately 18 months later. The efficacy of RTS,S/AS01 was variable among the 11 sites participating in the 2009-2014 phase III trial (MALARIA-055, NCT00866619), possibly due to differences in transmission intensity. However, a within-site examination of environmental factors related to transmission intensity and their impact on vaccine efficacy has yet to be conducted.MethodsWe implemented the phase III RTS,S/AS01 trial at the Malawi site, which enrolled 1578 infants (6-12 weeks) and children (5-17 months) living in the Lilongwe District in Central Malawi and followed them for 3 years between 2009 and 2014. A global positioning system survey and an ecological questionnaire were conducted to collect participant household locations and characteristics, while additional data on background malaria prevalence were obtained from a concurrent Malaria Transmission Intensity (MTI) survey. Negative binomial regression models were used to assess whether the efficacy of the vaccine varied by estimated background malaria prevalence, household roof type, or amount of nearby vegetation.ResultsVaccine efficacy did not significantly vary by estimated malaria prevalence or by roof type. However, increased vegetation cover was associated with an increase in the efficacy of the three-dose primary RTS,S/AS01 series in the 18 months before the fourth dose and a decrease in the efficacy of the primary vaccine series in the second 18 months following, if the fourth dose was not given. Vegetation cover did not alter the efficacy of the fourth dose in a statistically or practically significant manner.ConclusionsVegetation coverage in this study site might be a proxy for nearness to rivers or branching, shallow wetlands called "dambos" which could serve as breeding sites for mosquitoes. We observed statistically significant modification of the efficacy of RTS,S/AS01 by forest cover, suggesting that initial vaccine efficacy and the importance of the fourth dose varies based on ecological context.Trial registrationEfficacy of GSK Biologicals' Candidate Malaria Vaccine (257049) Against Malaria Disease Caused by P. falciparum Infection in Infants and Children in Africa. NCT00866619 prospectively registered 20 March 2009.

Project description:BackgroundA recent trial in Burkina Faso and Mali showed that combining seasonal RTS,S/AS01E malaria vaccination with seasonal malaria chemoprevention (SMC) substantially reduced the incidence of uncomplicated and severe malaria in young children compared to either intervention alone. Given the possible negative effect of malaria on nutrition, the study investigated whether these children also experienced lower prevalence of acute and chronic malnutrition.MethodsIn Burkina Faso and Mali 5920 children were randomized to receive either SMC alone, RTS,S/AS01E alone, or SMC combined with RTS,S/AS01E for three malaria transmission seasons (2017-2019). After each transmission season, anthropometric measurements were collected from all study children at a cross-sectional survey and used to derive nutritional status indicators, including the binary variables wasted and stunted (weight-for-height and height-for-age z-scores below - 2, respectively). Binary and continuous outcomes between treatment groups were compared by Poisson and linear regression.ResultsIn 2017, compared to SMC alone, the combined intervention reduced the prevalence of wasting by approximately 12% [prevalence ratio (PR) = 0.88 (95% CI 0.75, 1.03)], and approximately 21% in 2018 [PR = 0.79 (95% CI 0.62, 1.01)]. Point estimates were similar for comparisons with RTS,S/AS01E, but there was stronger evidence of a difference. There was at least a 30% reduction in the point estimates for the prevalence of severe wasting in the combined group compared to the other two groups in 2017 and 2018. There was no difference in the prevalence of moderate or severe wasting between the groups in 2019. The prevalence of stunting, low-MUAC-for-age or being underweight did not differ between groups for any of the three years. The prevalence of severe stunting was higher in the combined group compared to both other groups in 2018, and compared to RTS,S/AS01E alone in 2017; this observation does not have an obvious explanation and may be a chance finding. Overall, malnutrition was very common in this cohort, but declined over the study as the children became older.ConclusionsDespite a high burden of malnutrition and malaria in the study populations, and a major reduction in the incidence of malaria in children receiving both interventions, this had only a modest impact on nutritional status. Therefore, other interventions are needed to reduce the high burden of malnutrition in these areas.Trial registrationhttps://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03143218 , registered 8th May 2017.

Dataset Information

Simulated impact of RTS,S/AS01 vaccination programs in the context of changing malaria transmission.

Publications

Simulated impact of RTS,S/AS01 vaccination programs in the context of changing malaria transmission.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets