No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundReference values are very important in clinical management of patients, screening participants for enrolment into clinical trials and for monitoring the onset of adverse events during these trials. The aim of this was to establish gender-specific haematological and biochemical reference values for healthy adults in the central part of Ghana.MethodsA total of 691 adults between 18 and 59 years resident in the Kintampo North Municipality and South District in the central part of Ghana were randomly selected using the Kintampo Health and Demographic Surveillance System and enrolled in this cross-sectional survey. Out of these, 625 adults made up of 316 males and 309 females were assessed by a clinician to be healthy. Median values and nonparametric 95% reference values for 16 haematology and 22 biochemistry parameters were determined for this population based on the Clinical Laboratory and Standards Institute guidelines. Values established in this study were compared with the Caucasian values being used currently by our laboratory as reference values and also with data from other African and western countries.ResultsReference values established include: haemoglobin 113–164 g/L for males and 88–144 g/L for females; total white blood cell count 3.4–9.2×109/L; platelet count 88–352×109/L for males and 89–403×109/L for females; alanine aminotransferase 8–54 U/L for males and 6–51 U/L for females; creatinine 56–119 µmol/L for males and 53–106 µmol/L for females. Using the haematological reference values based on the package inserts would have screened out up to 53% of potential trial participants and up to 25% of the population using the biochemical parameters.ConclusionWe have established a panel of locally relevant reference parameters for commonly used haematological and biochemical tests. This is important as it will help in the interpretation of laboratory results both for clinical management of patients and safety monitoring during a trial.

No abstract

BackgroundThe target delivery channel of RTS,S candidate malaria vaccines in malaria-endemic countries in Africa is the World Health Organisation Expanded Program on Immunization. As an Adjuvant System, age de-escalation and schedule selection step, this study assessed 3 schedules of RTS,S/AS01E and RTS,S/AS02D in infants and young children 5–17 months of age in Ghana.MethodologyA Phase II, partially-blind randomized controlled study (blind to vaccine, not to schedule), of 19 months duration was conducted in two (2) centres in Ghana between August 2006 and May 2008. Subjects were allocated randomly (1∶1∶1∶1∶1∶1) to one of six study groups at each study site, each defining which vaccine should be given and by which schedule (0,1-, 0,1,2- or 0,1,7-months). For the 0,1,2-month schedule participants received RTS,S/AS01E or rabies vaccine at one center and RTS,S/AS01E or RTS,S/AS02D at the other. For the other schedules at both study sites, they received RTS,S/AS01E or RTS,S/AS02D. The primary outcome measure was the occurrence of serious adverse events until 10 months post dose 1.ResultsThe number of serious adverse events reported across groups was balanced. One child had a simple febrile convulsion, which evolved favourably without sequelae, considered to be related to RTS,S/AS01E vaccination. Low grade reactions occurred slightly more frequently in recipients of RTS,S/AS than rabies vaccines; grade 3 reactions were infrequent. Less local reactogenicity occurred with RTS,S/AS01E than RTS,S/AS02D. Both candidate vaccines were highly immunogenic for anti-circumsporozoite and anti-Hepatitis B Virus surface antigen antibodies. Recipients of RTS,S/AS01E compared to RTS,S/AS02D had higher peak anti-circumsporozoite antibody responses for all 3 schedules. Three dose schedules were more immunogenic than 2 dose schedules. Area under the curve analyses for anti-circumsporozoite antibodies were comparable between the 0,1,2- and 0,1,7-month RTS,S/AS01E schedules.ConclusionsBoth candidate malaria vaccines were well tolerated. Anti-circumsporozoite responses were greater with RTS,S/AS01E than RTS,S/AS02D and when 3 rather than 2 doses were given. This study supports the selection of RTS,S/AS01E and a 3 dose schedule for further development in children and infants.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT00360230