Controlled Human Infection Models To Accelerate Vaccine Development.

The timelines for developing vaccines against infectious diseases are lengthy, and often vaccines that reach the stage of large phase 3 field trials fail to provide the desired level of protective efficacy. The application of controlled human challenge models of infection and disease at the appropriate stages of development could accelerate development of candidate vaccines and, in fact, has done so successfully in some limited cases. Human challenge models could potentially be used to gather critical information on pathogenesis, inform strain selection for vaccines, explore cross-protective immunity, identify immune correlates of protection and mechanisms of protection induced by infection or evoked by candidate vaccines, guide decisions on appropriate trial endpoints, and evaluate vaccine efficacy. We prepared this report to motivate fellow scientists to exploit the potential capacity of controlled human challenge experiments to advance vaccine development. In this review, we considered available challenge models for 17 infectious diseases in the context of the public health importance of each disease, the diversity and pathogenesis of the causative organisms, the vaccine candidates under development, and each model's capacity to evaluate them and identify correlates of protective immunity. Our broad assessment indicated that human challenge models have not yet reached their full potential to support the development of vaccines against infectious diseases. On the basis of our review, however, we believe that describing an ideal challenge model is possible, as is further developing existing and future challenge models.

WHO informal consultation on regulatory considerations for evaluation of the quality, safety and efficacy of RNA-based prophylactic vaccines for infectious diseases, 20-22 April 2021.

This paper presents the key outcomes of the above WHO informal consultation with global stakeholders including regulatory authorities, vaccine developers and manufacturers, academia and other international health organizations and institutions involved in the development, evaluation and use of messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines. The aim of the consultation was to further clarify the main principles to be presented in an upcoming WHO guidance document on the regulatory considerations in evaluating the quality, safety and efficacy of mRNA prophylactic vaccines for infectious diseases. This WHO guidance document is intended to facilitate global mRNA vaccine development and regulatory convergence in the assessment of such vaccines. The urgent need to develop such a document as a new WHO written standard is outlined in this report along with the key scientific and regulatory challenges. A number of key conclusions are provided at the end of this report along with an update on the steps taken following this meeting.

WHO informal consultation on the guidelines for evaluation of the quality, safety, and efficacy of DNA vaccines, Geneva, Switzerland, December 2019.

Consultations have been held to promote the revision of the WHO guidelines for assuring the quality and nonclinical safety evaluation of DNA vaccines adopted by the Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) in 2005. The drivers for this revision are described, including the need for regulatory convergence highlighted by the WHO R&D Blueprint. These consultations have driven the revision to its current form, where a new guideline that includes quality, nonclinical, and clinical evaluation of plasmid DNA vaccines is being prepared for public consultation with a view to present to an upcoming ECBS. Major changes to the guidelines include streamlining the existing quality (part A) and nonclinical (part B) sections to reflect the two decades of experience, with manufacturing and control, nonclinical evaluation, and clinical testing of plasmid DNA vaccines, as a platform technology. The urgency for gaining regulatory convergence on this topic is that development of such a platform technology as DNA vaccines for routine use immunizations will prepare manufacturers and regulators across the globe in dealing with rapid development of medical countermeasures against emerging infectious diseases even in the face of an emergency setting. Two examples are described of Zika candidate vaccines that have rapidly advanced in development based on preexisting nonclinical and clinical data that precluded the need to repeat nonclinical toxicology. This report describes the progress stemming from the most recent consultation on the guidelines, including topics discussed and consensus reached.

Adventitious agents and live viral vectored vaccines: Considerations for archiving samples of biological materials for retrospective analysis.

Vaccines are one of the most effective public health medicinal products with an excellent safety record. As vaccines are produced using biological materials, there is a need to safeguard against potential contamination with adventitious agents. Adventitious agents could be inadvertently introduced into a vaccine through starting materials used for production. Therefore, extensive testing has been recommended at specific stages of vaccine manufacture to demonstrate the absence of adventitious agents. Additionally, the incorporation of viral clearance steps in the manufacturing process can aid in reducing the risk of adventitious agent contamination. However, for live viral vaccines, aside from possible purification of the virus or vector, extensive adventitious agent clearance may not be feasible. In the event that an adventitious agent is detected in a vaccine, it is important to determine its origin, evaluate its potential for human infection and pathology, and discern which batches of vaccine may have been affected in order to take risk mitigation action. To achieve this, it is necessary to have archived samples of the vaccine and ancillary components, ideally from developmental through to current batches, as well as samples of the biological materials used in the manufacture of the vaccine, since these are the most likely sources of an adventitious agent. The need for formal guidance on such vaccine sample archiving has been recognized but not fulfilled. We summarize in this paper several prior major cases of vaccine contamination with adventitious agents and provide points for consideration on sample archiving of live recombinant viral vector vaccines for use in humans.

Unique safety issues associated with virus-vectored vaccines: Potential for and theoretical consequences of recombination with wild type virus strains.

In 2003 and 2013, the World Health Organization convened informal consultations on characterization and quality aspects of vaccines based on live virus vectors. In the resulting reports, one of several issues raised for future study was the potential for recombination of virus-vectored vaccines with wild type pathogenic virus strains. This paper presents an assessment of this issue formulated by the Brighton Collaboration. To provide an appropriate context for understanding the potential for recombination of virus-vectored vaccines, we review briefly the current status of virus-vectored vaccines, mechanisms of recombination between viruses, experience with recombination involving live attenuated vaccines in the field, and concerns raised previously in the literature regarding recombination of virus-vectored vaccines with wild type virus strains. We then present a discussion of the major variables that could influence recombination between a virus-vectored vaccine and circulating wild type virus and the consequences of such recombination, including intrinsic recombination properties of the parent virus used as a vector; sequence relatedness of vector and wild virus; virus host range, pathogenesis and transmission; replication competency of vector in target host; mechanism of vector attenuation; additional factors potentially affecting virulence; and circulation of multiple recombinant vectors in the same target population. Finally, we present some guiding principles for vector design and testing intended to anticipate and mitigate the potential for and consequences of recombination of virus-vectored vaccines with wild type pathogenic virus strains.

Scientific and regulatory challenges in evaluating clinical trial protocols for HIV-1/AIDS vaccines - A review from a regulatory perspective.

Clinical development of prophylactic HIV/AIDS vaccines presents many scientific challenges that result in challenges for regulators reviewing clinical trial applications (CTAs). The World Health Organization (WHO) has the responsibility to provide technical support to these regulators. The search for an HIV/AIDS vaccine will only succeed through well-designed, -conducted and -controlled human efficacy studies reviewed and approved by regulators in countries worldwide, particularly in countries where the epidemic has hit hardest, such as in sub-Saharan Africa and Asia. This review summarizes the current candidates in development and focuses on challenges regulators face when reviewing CTAs, such as the evolving landscape of "standard of prevention," trials in adolescents, adaptive trial designs, correlates of protection and their analysis, and access to successful vaccines. There are many unknowns in the field of HIV/AIDS vaccine development and often, there is not a clear right or wrong approach because of the scientific challenges described in this review. Consequently, regulators should not feel that decisions need be made in isolation, when there are many available international collaborative efforts and opportunities to seek expert advice. The WHO provides many such opportunities and support to regulators across the globe.

Review of efficacy trials of HIV-1/AIDS vaccines and regulatory lessons learned: A review from a regulatory perspective.

The clinical development of prophylactic HIV-1/AIDS vaccines is confounded by numerous scientific challenges and these in turn result in challenges to regulators reviewing clinical trial applications (CTAs). The search for an HIV-1/AIDS vaccine will only succeed through the conduct of well-designed, well-conducted and well-controlled human efficacy studies. This review summarizes relevant context in which HIV vaccines are being investigated and the six completed efficacy trials of various candidate vaccines and regimens, as well as the lessons learned from them relevant to regulatory evaluation. A companion review focuses on the scientific challenges regulators face and summarizes some current candidates in development. The lessons learned from the completed efficacy trials will enable the development of better designed, potentially more efficient efficacy trials in future. This summary, supported by the World Health Organization (WHO), is unique in that it is meant to aid regulators in understanding the valuable lessons gained from experience in the field to date.

Human challenge trials in vaccine development: Strasbourg, September 29 - October 1, 2014.

An international workshop to discuss the role of Human Challenge Trials (HCT) in vaccine development was held in Strasbourg, France from 29 September to 1 October 2015. In addition to scientific presentations, several panel discussions focused on key questions and proposed recommendations, including the acknowledgement that HCT have proven to be useful tools to explore vaccine targets, identify immune correlates of protection, and evaluate clinical efficacy, and when appropriate they should be continued and encouraged. In some cases, a HCT may be the only feasible way to move forward with development of an investigational product. HCT must be strongly scientifically justified, because the need for a given investigational objective must be always balanced against the risks a HCT may pose, understanding that an infectious organism will be given to the study participants. It should be noted that numerous HCT have been successfully performed, safely and ethically, to the benefit of vaccine development and public health. This workshop report highlights the scientific presentations, discussions by the panelists and attendees, and twenty recommendations that emerged as considerations for future development of international guidance on the role of HCT in vaccine development and licensure.

First-in-Human Evaluation of the Safety and Immunogenicity of a Recombinant Vesicular Stomatitis Virus Human Immunodeficiency Virus-1 gag Vaccine (HVTN 090).

Background. We report the first-in-human safety and immunogenicity evaluation of a highly attenuated, replication-competent recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (rVSV) human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 vaccine. Methods. Sixty healthy, HIV-1-uninfected adults were enrolled in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled dose-escalation study. Groups of 12 participants received rVSV HIV-1 gag vaccine at 5 dose levels (4.6 × 10(3) to 3.4 × 10(7) particle forming units) (N = 10/group) or placebo (N = 2/group), delivered intramuscularly as bilateral injections at 0 and 2 months. Safety monitoring included VSV cultures from blood, urine, saliva, and swabs of oral lesions. Vesicular stomatitis virus-neutralizing antibodies, T-cell immunogenicity, and HIV-1 specific binding antibodies were assessed. Results. Local and systemic reactogenicity symptoms were mild to moderate and increased with dose. No severe reactogenicity or product-related serious adverse events were reported, and all rVSV cultures were negative. All vaccine recipients became seropositive for VSV after 2 vaccinations. gag-specific T-cell responses were detected in 63% of participants by interferon-γ enzyme-linked immunospot at the highest dose post boost. Conclusions. An attenuated replication-competent rVSV gag vaccine has an acceptable safety profile in healthy adults. This rVSV vector is a promising new vaccine platform for the development of vaccines to combat HIV-1 and other serious human diseases.

WHO consultation on clinical evaluation of vaccines, 17-18 July 2014, WHO Headquarters, Geneva, Switzerland.

A World Health Organization (WHO) consultation on guidelines for National Regulatory Authorities (NRAs) and vaccine manufacturers on clinical evaluation of vaccines was held from 17 to 18 July 2014, to review key scientific challenges that regulators have been facing since the establishment of the WHO Guidelines on Clinical Evaluation of Vaccines. The guidelines, adopted by the WHO Expert Committee on Biological Standardization (ECBS) in 2001, have served as the basis for setting or updating national requirements for the evaluation and licensing of a broad range of vaccines as well as for WHO vaccine prequalification. Regulators from Australia, Brazil, China, Canada, Germany, India, Republic of Korea, South Africa, United States of America and the United Kingdom were represented. The International Federation for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers' Association (IFPMA) and the Developing Country Vaccine Manufacturers' Network (DCVMN) provided industry representation. The consultation concluded that the guidelines should be revised to address issues that were raised in the context of vaccines that were the subject of clinical development in the past decade. Although the current guidelines have served well over time, it was recognized that an update would further increase their utility and would help regulators, manufacturers, vaccine developers and academia to respond to the challenging questions regarding the safety, immunogenicity, efficacy and effectiveness of vaccines intended for global use. A summary of the main outcomes of the consultation and proposals for the next steps regarding the guidelines and beyond are provided in this report.

Now that you want to take your HIV/AIDS vaccine/biological product research concept into the clinic: what are the "cGMP"?

The Division of AIDS Vaccine Research Program funds the discovery and development of HIV/AIDS vaccine candidates. Basic researchers, having discovered a potential vaccine in the laboratory, next want to take that candidate into the clinic to test the concept in humans, to see if it translates. Many of them have heard of "cGMP" and know that they are supposed to make a "GMP product" to take into the clinic, but often they are not very familiar with what "cGMP" means and why these good practices are so important. As members of the Vaccine Translational Research Branch, we frequently get asked "can't we use the material we made in the lab in the clinic?" or "aren't Phase 1 studies exempt from cGMP?" Over the years, we have had many experiences where researchers or their selected contract manufacturing organizations have not applied an appropriate degree of compliance with cGMP suitable for the clinical phase of development. We share some of these experiences and the lessons learned, along with explaining the importance of cGMP, just what cGMP means, and what they can assure, in an effort to de-mystify this subject and facilitate the rapid and safe translational development of HIV vaccines.

The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG).

Recombinant viral vectors provide an effective means for heterologous antigen expression in vivo and thus represent promising platforms for developing novel vaccines against human pathogens from Ebola to tuberculosis. An increasing number of candidate viral vector vaccines are entering human clinical trials. The Brighton Collaboration Viral Vector Vaccines Safety Working Group (V3SWG) was formed to improve our ability to anticipate potential safety issues and meaningfully assess or interpret safety data, thereby facilitating greater public acceptance when licensed.

Adventitious agents in viral vaccines: lessons learned from 4 case studies.

Since the earliest days of biological product manufacture, there have been a number of instances where laboratory studies provided evidence for the presence of adventitious agents in a marketed product. Lessons learned from such events can be used to strengthen regulatory preparedness for the future. We have therefore selected four instances where an adventitious agent, or a signal suggesting the presence of an agent, was found in a viral vaccine, and have developed a case study for each. The four cases are: a) SV40 in polio vaccines; b) bacteriophage in measles and polio vaccines; c) reverse transcriptase in measles and mumps vaccines; and d) porcine circovirus and porcine circovirus DNA sequences in rotavirus vaccines. The lessons learned from each event are discussed. Based in part on those experiences, certain scientific principles have been identified by WHO that should be considered in regulatory risk evaluation if an adventitious agent is found in a marketed vaccine in the future.

Systematic evaluation of in vitro and in vivo adventitious virus assays for the detection of viral contamination of cell banks and biological products.

Viral vaccines and the cell substrates used to manufacture them are subjected to tests for adventitious agents, including viruses, contaminate. Some of the compendial methods (in vivo and in vitro in cell culture) were established in the mid-20th century. These methods have not been subjected to current assay validation, as new methods would need to be. This study was undertaken to provide insight into the breadth (selectivity) and sensitivity (limit of detection) of the routine methods, two such validation parameters. Sixteen viral stocks were prepared and characterized. These stocks were tested in serial dilutions by the routine methods to establish which viruses were detected by which methods and above what limit of detection. Sixteen out of sixteen viruses were detected in vitro, though one (bovine viral diarrhea virus) required special conditions to detect and another (rubella virus) was detected with low sensitivity. Many were detected at levels below 1 TCID50 or PFU (titers were established on the production cell line in most cases). In contrast, in vivo, only 6/11 viruses were detected, and 4 of these were detected only at amounts one or more logs above 1 TCID50 or PFU. Only influenza virus and vesicular stomatitis virus were detected at lower amounts in vivo than in vitro. Given the call to reduce, refine, or replace (3Rs) the use of animals in product safety testing and the emergence of new technologies for the detection of viruses, a re-examination of the current adventitious virus testing strategies seems warranted. Suggested pathways forward are offered.

Opinion on adventitious agents testing for vaccines: why do we worry so much about adventitious agents in vaccines?

The manner in which viral vaccines are produced in a biological system makes them vulnerable to microbial contamination. Considerable effort is expended to avoid such contamination and to detect it if it occurred. Is this effort warranted, efficient, scientifically sound, and rational? When asked for my opinion on these matters, I agreed to discuss the basis and historical context for why we do what we do and proffer opinion on what we might do instead or in addition, as we look forward to the inclusion of new strategies and methods in our arsenal. Being an advocate of the 3 R's policy, I invite a re-examination of the traditional in vivo methods in particular. I also advocate for a risk-based approach consistent with "Quality by Design" as a more scientific and rational means of addressing these issues. In the end, vaccinologists need to reassure the public that the vaccines they or their children receive are safe and pure and that all reasonable measures are taken to safeguard them.

Potential use of inflammation and early immunological event biomarkers in assessing vaccine safety.

Highly effective vaccines have traditionally been designed in a rather empirical way, often with incomplete understanding of their mode of action. Full assessment of efficacy and reactogenicity takes time and, as a result, vaccine introduction to the market is usually slow and expensive. In addition, in rare cases, unacceptable reactogenicity may only become apparent after years of development or even widespread use. However, recent advances in cell biology and immunology offer a range of new technologies and systems for identifying biological responses or "biomarkers" that could possibly be used to evaluate and predict efficacy and safety during vaccine development and post-marketing surveillance. This report reflects the conclusions of a group of scientists from academia, regulatory agencies and industry who attended a conference on the potential use of biomarkers to assess vaccine safety which was held in Baltimore, Maryland, USA, from 10 to 11 May 2012 and organized by the International Association for Biologicals (IABS). The conference focused particularly on determining which biomarkers might relate to vaccine efficacy and reactogenicity and whether our knowledge base was sufficiently robust at this time for the data to be used for decision-making. More information on the conference output can be found on the IABS website, http://www.iabs.org/.

Adventitious agents, new technology, and risk assessment, 19-20 May 2011, Baltimore, MD.

In May 2011, the International Alliance for Biological Standardization, with the cooperation of WHO, FDA, and NIAID, organized a conference on adventitious agents that might be found in biological products using new technology (http://www.iabs.org/index.php/past-conference-reports/116-baltimore-2011-slides). The implications of such findings on risk assessment also were considered. Topics that were addressed included: a) current routine testing--what are we doing now?; b) recent advances in testing--what tests are being explored/applied?; c) examples of finding agents with "new" techniques; and d) risk assessment, including recent WHO activities. A draft algorithm for risk assessment was discussed in terms of its applicability to a variety of potential new agents and the possibilities for improving it.

Evaluation of the human host range of bovine and porcine viruses that may contaminate bovine serum and porcine trypsin used in the manufacture of biological products.

Current U.S. requirements for testing cell substrates used in production of human biological products for contamination with bovine and porcine viruses are U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) 9CFR tests for bovine serum or porcine trypsin. 9CFR requires testing of bovine serum for seven specific viruses in six families (immunofluorescence) and at least 2 additional families non-specifically (cytopathicity and hemadsorption). 9CFR testing of porcine trypsin is for porcine parvovirus. Recent contaminations suggest these tests may not be sufficient. Assay sensitivity was not the issue for these contaminations that were caused by viruses/virus families not represented in the 9CFR screen. A detailed literature search was undertaken to determine which viruses that infect cattle or swine or bovine or porcine cells in culture also have human host range [ability to infect humans or human cells in culture] and to predict their detection by the currently used 9CFR procedures. There are more viruses of potential risk to biological products manufactured using bovine or porcine raw materials than are likely to be detected by 9CFR testing procedures; even within families, not all members would necessarily be detected. Testing gaps and alternative methodologies should be evaluated to continue to ensure safe, high quality human biologicals.

Mode of action of adjuvants: implications for vaccine safety and design.

For decades, the search for new vaccine adjuvants has been largely empirical. A series of new adjuvants and related formulations are now emerging that are acting through identified immunological mechanisms. Understanding adjuvant mechanism of action is crucial for vaccine design, since this allows for directing immune responses towards efficacious disease-specific effector mechanisms and appropriate memory. It is also of great importance to build new paradigms for assessing adjuvant safety at development stages and at regulatory level. This report reflects the conclusions of a group of scientists from academia, regulatory agencies and industry who attended a conference, organized by the International Association for Biologicals (IABS), on the mode of action of adjuvants on 29-30 April 2010 in Bethesda, Maryland, USA, particularly focusing on how understanding adjuvants mode of action can impact on the assessment of vaccine safety and help to develop target-specific vaccines. More information on the conference output can be found on the IABS website, http://www.iabs.org/.

Biodistribution and toxicological safety of adenovirus type 5 and type 35 vectored vaccines against human immunodeficiency virus-1 (HIV-1), Ebola, or Marburg are similar despite differing adenovirus serotype vector, manufacturer's construct, or gene inserts.

The Vaccine Research Center has developed vaccine candidates for different diseases/infectious agents (including HIV-1, Ebola, and Marburg viruses) built on an adenovirus vector platform, based on adenovirus type 5 or 35. To support clinical development of each vaccine candidate, pre-clinical studies were performed in rabbits to determine where in the body they biodistribute and how rapidly they clear, and to screen for potential toxicities (intrinsic and immunotoxicities). The vaccines biodistribute only to spleen, liver (Ad5 only), and/or iliac lymph node (Ad35 only) and otherwise remain in the site of injection muscle and overlying subcutis. Though approximately 10(11) viral particles were inoculated, already by Day 9, all but 10(3) to 10(5) genome copies per mu g of DNA had cleared from the injection site muscle. By three months, the adenovector was cleared with, at most, a few animals retaining a small number of copies in the injection site, spleen (Ad5), or iliac lymph node (Ad35). This pattern of limited biodistribution and extensive clearance is consistent regardless of differences in adenovector type (Ad5 or 35), manufacturer's construct and production methods, or gene-insert. Repeated dose toxicology studies identified treatment-related toxicities confined primarily to the sites of injection, in certain clinical pathology parameters, and in body temperatures (Ad5 vectors) and food consumption immediately post-inoculation. Systemic reactogenicity and reactogenicity at the sites of injection demonstrated reversibility. These data demonstrate the safety and suitability for investigational human use of Ad5 or Ad35 adenovector-based vaccine candidates at doses of up to 2 x 10(11) given intramuscularly to prevent various infectious diseases.