Anthrax prevention through vaccine and post-exposure therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Vaccines and therapeutic antibodies are the most crucial components of anthrax prophylaxis (pre- and post-exposure) and treatment. The improvement in the availability and safety profile of vaccines and the therapeutic antibodies has helped immensely in reducing the worldwide burden of anthrax. AREAS COVERED: Current recommendations for anthrax prophylaxis and control, vaccines and therapeutic antibodies, the recent endeavors, particularly, made after 2010 toward making them safer and more efficacious along with our opinion on its future course. Primarily, PubMed and Europe PMC were searched to cover the recent developments in the above-indicated areas. EXPERT OPINION: Some key existing lacunae in our understanding of the working of biologicals-based anthrax-control measures, i.e., vaccines and therapeutic antibodies, should be addressed to improve their overall stability, safety profile, and efficacy. The identification of novel inhibitors targeting different key-molecules and vital-steps contributing to the overall anthrax pathophysiology could make a difference in anthrax control.

From subjects to relations: Bioethics and the articulation of postcolonial politics in the Cambodia Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis trial.

Controversies about global clinical trials, particularly HIV trials, tend to be framed in terms of ethics. In this article, I explore debates about ethics in the Cambodia Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis trial, which was designed to test the safety and efficacy of tenofovir as a prevention for HIV infection. Bringing together studies of public participation in science with studies of bioethics, I show how activists around the Cambodian Pre-Exposure Prophylaxis trial circulated and provoked debates about standards of research ethics, as opposed to research methodology. This postcolonial bioethics was configured through the circulation of and debate about ethics guidelines, and historically and culturally specific relations of vulnerability and responsibility between foreigners and Cambodians and between Cambodian leaders and Cambodian subjects. I argue that this shift in the object of ethical concern, from the experimental human subject to the relation between subjects and researchers, illustrates how a postcolonial field of articulation reformulates classical bioethics.