No abstract

BackgroundThis Phase 1/2a study evaluated the safety, immunogenicity, and efficacy of an experimental malaria vaccine comprised of the recombinant Plasmodium falciparum protein apical membrane antigen-1 (AMA-1) representing the 3D7 allele formulated with either the AS01B or AS02A Adjuvant Systems.Methodology/Principal FindingsAfter a preliminary safety evaluation of low dose AMA-1/AS01B (10 µg/0.5 mL) in 5 adults, 30 malaria-naïve adults were randomly allocated to receive full dose (50 µg/0.5 mL) of AMA-1/AS01B (n = 15) or AMA-1/AS02A (n = 15), followed by a malaria challenge. All vaccinations were administered intramuscularly on a 0-, 1-, 2-month schedule. All volunteers experienced transient injection site erythema, swelling and pain. Two weeks post-third vaccination, anti-AMA-1 Geometric Mean Antibody Concentrations (GMCs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs) were high: low dose AMA-1/AS01B 196 µg/mL (103–371 µg/mL), full dose AMA-1/AS01B 279 µg/mL (210–369 µg/mL) and full dose AMA-1/AS02A 216 µg/mL (169–276 µg/mL) with no significant difference among the 3 groups. The three vaccine formulations elicited equivalent functional antibody responses, as measured by growth inhibition assay (GIA), against homologous but not against heterologous (FVO) parasites as well as demonstrable interferon-gamma (IFN-γ) responses. To assess efficacy, volunteers were challenged with P. falciparum-infected mosquitoes, and all became parasitemic, with no significant difference in the prepatent period by either light microscopy or quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR). However, a small but significant reduction of parasitemia in the AMA-1/AS02A group was seen with a statistical model employing qPCR measurements.SignificanceAll three vaccine formulations were found to be safe and highly immunogenic. These immune responses did not translate into significant vaccine efficacy in malaria-naïve adults employing a primary sporozoite challenge model, but encouragingly, estimation of parasite growth rates from qPCR data may suggest a partial biological effect of the vaccine. Further evaluation of the immunogenicity and efficacy of the AMA-1/AS02A formulation is ongoing in a malaria-experienced pediatric population in Mali.Trial Registration www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT00385047

BackgroundSince late 2003, highly pathogenic avian influenza (HPAI) outbreaks caused by infection with H5N1 virus has led to the deaths of millions of poultry and more than 10 thousands of wild birds, and as of 18-March 2008, at least 373 laboratory-confirmed human infections with 236 fatalities, have occurred. The unrestrained worldwide spread of this disease has caused great anxiety about the potential of another global pandemic. However, the effect of environmental factors influencing the spread of HPAI H5N1 virus is unclear.Methodology/Principal FindingsA database including incident dates and locations was developed for 128 confirmed HPAI H5N1 outbreaks in poultry and wild birds, as well as 21 human cases in mainland China during 2004–2006. These data, together with information on wild bird migration, poultry densities, and environmental variables (water bodies, wetlands, transportation routes, main cities, precipitation and elevation), were integrated into a Geographical Information System (GIS). A case-control design was used to identify the environmental factors associated with the incidence of the disease. Multivariate logistic regression analysis indicated that minimal distance to the nearest national highway, annual precipitation and the interaction between minimal distance to the nearest lake and wetland, were important predictive environmental variables for the risk of HPAI. A risk map was constructed based on these factors.Conclusions/SignificanceOur study indicates that environmental factors contribute to the spread of the disease. The risk map can be used to target countermeasures to stop further spread of the HPAI H5N1 at its source.

Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

No abstract

BackgroundMan to mosquito transmission of malaria depends on the presence of the sexual stage parasites, gametocytes, that often circulate at low densities. Gametocyte densities below the microscopical threshold of detection may be sufficient to infect mosquitoes but the importance of submicroscopical gametocyte carriage in different transmission settings is unknown.Methodology/Principal FindingsMembrane feeding experiments were carried out on 80 children below 14 years of age at the end of the wet season in an area of seasonal malaria transmission in Burkina Faso. Gametocytes were quantified by microscopy and by Pfs25-based quantitative nucleic acid sequence-based amplification assay (QT-NASBA). The children's infectiousness was determined by membrane feeding experiments in which a venous blood sample was offered to locally reared Anopheles mosquitoes. Gametocytes were detected in 30.0% (24/80) of the children by microscopy compared to 91.6% (65/71) by QT-NASBA (p<0.001). We observed a strong association between QT-NASBA gametocyte density and infection rates (p = 0.007). Children with microscopically detectable gametocytes were more likely to be infectious (68.2% compared to 31.7% of carriers of submicroscopical gametocytes, p = 0.001), and on average infected more mosquitoes (13.2% compared to 2.3%, p<0.001). However, because of the high prevalence of submicroscopical gametocyte carriage in the study population, carriers of sub-microscopical gametocytes were responsible for 24.2% of the malaria transmission in this population.Conclusions/SignificanceSubmicroscopical gametocyte carriage is common in an area of seasonal transmission in Burkina Faso and contributes substantially to the human infectious reservoir. Submicroscopical gametocyte carriage should therefore be considered when implementing interventions that aim to reduce malaria transmission.

No abstract

Background New WHO guidelines recommend ART initiation for HIV-positive persons with CD4 cell counts ≤500 cells/µL, a higher threshold than was previously recommended. Country decision makers must consider whether to further expand ART eligibility accordingly. Methods We used multiple independent mathematical models in four settings—South Africa, Zambia, India, and Vietnam—to evaluate the potential health impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of different adult ART eligibility criteria under scenarios of current and expanded treatment coverage, with results projected over 20 years. Analyses considered extending eligibility to include individuals with CD4 ≤500 cells/µL or all HIV-positive adults, compared to the previous recommendation of initiation with CD4 ≤350 cells/µL. We assessed costs from a health system perspective, and calculated the incremental cost per DALY averted ($/DALY) to compare competing strategies. Strategies were considered ‘very cost-effective’ if the $/DALY was less than the country’s per capita gross domestic product (GDP; South Africa: $8040, Zambia: $1425, India: $1489, Vietnam: $1407) and ‘cost-effective’ if $/DALY was less than three times per capita GDP. Findings In South Africa, the cost per DALY averted of extending ART eligibility to CD4 ≤500 cells/µL ranged from $237 to $1691/DALY compared to 2010 guidelines; in Zambia, expanded eligibility ranged from improving health outcomes while reducing costs (i.e. dominating current guidelines) to $749/DALY. Results were similar in scenarios with substantially expanded treatment access and for expanding eligibility to all HIV-positive adults. Expanding treatment coverage in the general population was therefore found to be cost-effective. In India, eligibility for all HIV-positive persons ranged from $131 to $241/DALY and in Vietnam eligibility for CD4 ≤500 cells/µL cost $290/DALY. In concentrated epidemics, expanded access among key populations was also cost-effective. Interpretation Earlier ART eligibility is estimated to be very cost-effective in low- and middle-income settings, although these questions should be revisited as further information becomes available. Scaling-up ART should be considered among other high-priority health interventions competing for health budgets. Funding The Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and World Health Organization