PRIMVAC vaccine adjuvanted with Alhydrogel or GLA-SE to prevent placental malaria: a first-in-human, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: PRIMVAC is a VAR2CSA-derived placental malaria vaccine candidate aiming to prevent serious clinical outcomes of Plasmodium falciparum infection during pregnancy. We assessed the safety and immunogenicity of PRIMVAC adjuvanted with Alhydrogel or glucopyranosyl lipid adjuvant in stable emulsion (GLA-SE) in French and Burkinabe women who were not pregnant. METHODS: This first-in-human, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose escalation trial was done in two staggered phases, a phase 1A trial in 18-35-year-old women who were malaria naive in a hospital in France and a subsequent phase 1B trial in women who were naturally exposed to P falciparum and nulligravid in the clinical site of a research centre in Burkina Faso. Volunteers were recruited into four sequential cohorts receiving PRIMVAC intramuscularly at day 0, 28, and 56: two cohorts in France receiving 20 µg or 50 µg of PRIMVAC and then two in Burkina Faso receiving 50 µg or 100 µg of PRIMVAC. Volunteers were randomly assigned (1:1) to two groups (PRIMVAC adjuvanted with either Alhydrogel or GLA-SE) in France and randomly assigned (2:2:1) to three groups (PRIMVAC adjuvanted with either Alhydrogel, GLA-SE, or placebo) in Burkina Faso. Randomisation was centralised, using stratification by cohort and blocks of variable size, and syringes were masked by opaque labels. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants with any grade 3 or higher adverse reaction to vaccination up until day 35. Safety at later time points as well as humoral and cellular immunogenicity were assessed in secondary endpoints. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02658253. FINDINGS: Between April 19, 2016, and July 13, 2017, 68 women (18 in France, 50 in Burkina Faso) of 101 assessed for eligibility were included. No serious adverse event related to the vaccine occurred. PRIMVAC antibody titres increased with each dose and seroconversion was observed in all women vaccinated with PRIMVAC (n=57). PRIMVAC antibody titres reached a peak (geometric mean 11 843·0, optical density [OD] 1·0, 95% CI 7559·8-18 552·9 with 100 µg dose and GLA-SE) 1 week after the third vaccination (day 63). Compared with Alhydrogel, GLA-SE tended to improve the PRIMVAC antibody response (geometric mean 2163·5, OD 1·0, 95% CI 1315·7-3557·7 with 100 µg dose and Alhydrogel at day 63). 1 year after the last vaccination, 20 (71%) of 28 women who were vaccinated with PRIMVAC/Alhydrogel and 26 (93%) of 28 women who were vaccinated with PRIMVAC/GLA-SE still had anti-PRIMVAC antibodies, although antibody magnitude was markedly lower (452·4, OD 1·0, 95% CI 321·8-636·1 with 100 µg dose and GLA-SE). These antibodies reacted with native homologous VAR2CSA expressed by NF54-CSA infected erythrocytes (fold change from baseline at day 63 with 100 µg dose and GLA-SE: 10·74, 95% CI 8·36-13·79). Limited cross-recognition, restricted to sera collected from women that received the 100 µg PRIMVAC dose, was observed against heterologous VAR2CSA variants expressed by FCR3-CSA (fold change from baseline at day 63: 1·49, 95% CI 1·19-1·88) and 7G8-CSA infected erythrocytes (1·2, 1·08-1·34). INTERPRETATION: PRIMVAC adjuvanted with Alhydrogel or GLA-SE had an acceptable safety profile, was immunogenic, and induced functional antibodies reacting with the homologous VAR2CSA variant expressed by NF54-CSA infected erythrocytes. Cross-reactivity against heterologous VAR2CSA variants was limited and only observed in the higher dose group. An alternate schedule of immunisation, antigen dose, and combinations with other VAR2CSA-based vaccines are envisaged to improve the cross-reactivity against heterologous VAR2CSA variants. FUNDING: Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung, through Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau, Germany; Inserm, and Institut National de Transfusion Sanguine, France; Irish Aid, Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Ireland.

Safety and efficacy of re-treatments with pyronaridine-artesunate in African patients with malaria: a substudy of the WANECAM randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Sparse data on the safety of pyronaridine-artesunate after repeated treatment of malaria episodes restrict its clinical use. We therefore compared the safety of pyronaridine-artesunate after treatment of the first episode of malaria versus re-treatment in a substudy analysis. METHODS: This planned substudy analysis of the randomised, open-label West African Network for Clinical Trials of Antimalarial Drugs (WANECAM) phase 3b/4 trial was done at six health facilities in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Guinea in patients (aged ≥6 months and bodyweight ≥5 kg) with uncomplicated microscopically confirmed Plasmodium spp malaria (parasite density <200 000 per µL blood) and fever or history of fever. The primary safety endpoint was incidence of hepatotoxicity: alanine aminotransferase of greater than five times the upper limit of normal (ULN) or Hy's criteria (alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase greater than three times the ULN and total bilirubin more than twice the ULN) after treatment of the first episode of malaria and re-treatment (≥28 days after first treatment) with pyronaridine-artesunate. Pyronaridine-artesunate efficacy was compared with artemether-lumefantrine with the adequate clinical and parasitological response (ACPR) in an intention-to-treat analysis. WANECAM is registered with PACTR.org, number PACTR201105000286876. FINDINGS: Following first treatment, 13 (1%) of 996 patients had hepatotoxicity (including one [<1%] possible Hy's law case) versus two (1%) of 311 patients on re-treatment (neither a Hy's law case). No evidence was found that pyronaridine-artesunate re-treatment increased safety risk based on laboratory values, reported adverse event frequencies, or electrocardiograph findings. For all first treatment or re-treatment episodes, pyronaridine-artesunate (n=673) day 28 crude ACPR was 92·7% (95% CI 91·0-94·3) versus 80·4% (77·8-83·0) for artemether-lumefantrine (n=671). After exclusion of patients with PCR-confirmed new infections, ACPR was similar on treatment and re-treatment and greater than 95% at day 28 and greater than 91% at day 42 in both treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: The findings that pyronaridine-artesunate safety and efficacy were similar on first malaria treatment versus re-treatment of subsequent episodes lend support for the wider access to pyronaridine-artesunate as an alternative artemisinin-based combination treatment for malaria in sub-Saharan Africa. FUNDING: European and Developing Countries Clinical Trial Partnership, Medicines for Malaria Venture (Geneva, Switzerland), UK Medical Research Council, Swedish International Development Cooperation Agency, German Ministry for Education and Research, University Claude Bernard (Lyon, France), Malaria Research and Training Centre (Bamako, Mali), Centre National de Recherche et de Formation sur le Paludisme (Burkina Faso), Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Santé (Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso), and Centre National de Formation et de Recherche en Santé Rurale (Republic of Guinea).