Explore the vast range of titles available.

The immunostimulants 3-O-desacyl-4 -monophosphoryl lipid A (MPL) and the saponin QS-21 are part of licensed or candidate vaccines. MPL and QS-21 directly affect the innate immune response to orchestrate the quality and intensity of the adaptive immune response to the vaccine antigens. The combination of immunostimulants in different adjuvant formulations forms the basis of Adjuvant Systems (AS) as a way to promote appropriate protective immune responses following vaccination. MPL and aluminum salts are present in AS04, and both MPL and QS-21 are present in AS01 and AS02, which are liposome- and emulsion-based formulations, respectively. The recent clinical performance of AS01-, AS02- and AS04-adjuvanted vaccines will be discussed in the context of the diseases being targeted. The licensing of two AS04-adjuvanted vaccines and the initiation of Phase III trials with an AS01-adjuvanted vaccine demonstrate the potential to develop new or improved human vaccines that contain MPL or MPL and QS-21.

► A more effective TB vaccine is urgently needed. ► AS02 and AS01 adjuvanted M72 vaccines were evaluated for safety and immunogenicity. ► Both M72/AS01 and M72/AS02 vaccines were well tolerated. ► Both M72/AS01 and M72/AS02 vaccines induced strong cell-mediated immune responses. ► M72/AS01 induced significantly higher Th1 CD4+ T cell responses. The Bacille Calmette–Guérin (BCG) tuberculosis (TB) vaccine provides incomplete protection, necessitating development of an effective vaccine against TB disease. The Mtb72F/AS02 candidate vaccine was previously shown to be clinically well tolerated and immunogenic in Purified Protein Derivative (PPD)-negative adults. To improve the stability of Mtb72F, a point mutation was introduced into a putative serine protease site to give the final M72 construct. AS01 is an Adjuvant System that can potentially improve both humoral and cellular immune responses compared to the AS02 Adjuvant System or unadjuvanted vaccine. This study evaluated the safety and immunogenicity in Mtb-naïve adults of vaccines containing 40μg of the M72 antigen with AS02 or AS01 and compared the results with Mtb72F/AS02 vaccine (40μg dose), M72 in saline (40μg dose) and AS01 alone. In this Phase I/II observer-blind controlled trial, 110 participants were randomized (4:4:1:1:1) to receive M72/AS01, M72/AS02, Mtb72F/AS02, M72/saline or AS01, following a 0, 1-month schedule. Subjects receiving the adjuvanted M72 vaccines were followed up until 3 years post vaccination. Evaluation of the immune response and safety/reactogenicity was performed. For all vaccines, solicited adverse events (AEs) were predominantly mild to moderate and transient. No vaccine-related serious AEs occurred and no subject withdrew due to an AE. Immune responses induced by Mtb72F and M72 antigens combined with AS02 were similar. M72/AS01 and M72/AS02 induced robust polyfunctional M72-specific CD4+ T cell and antibody responses persisting at 3 years, with the highest CD4+ T cell responses found with M72/AS01. This first clinical study with M72/AS01 and M72/AS02 showed that both vaccines were clinically well tolerated and induced high magnitude and persistent cell-mediated and humoral immune responses. The Mtb72F/AS02 and M72/AS02 vaccines were comparably immunogenic with significantly higher immune responses compared to the M72/saline control. Of the formulations tested, M72/AS01 demonstrated significantly higher vaccine specific Th1 CD4+ T cell responses supporting its further clinical evaluation.

Previous studies with the malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS02 A in young children in a malaria endemic area of Mozambique have shown it to have a promising safety profile and to reduce the risk of Plasmodium falciparum infection and disease. In this study, we assessed the antibody responses to the P. falciparum and hepatitis B components of the RTS,S/AS02 A vaccine over a 45 months surveillance period in a large phase IIb trial which included 2022 children aged 1–4 years at recruitment. The RTS,S/AS02 A vaccine induced high anti-circumsporozoite antibody levels with at least 96% of children remaining seropositive during the entire follow-up period. IgG titers decayed over the first 6 months of follow-up to about 25% of the initial level, but still remained 30-fold higher until month 45 compared to controls. Children with higher levels of naturally acquired immunity at baseline, assessed by blood stage indirect fluorescent antibody test, had slightly higher anti-circumsporozoite levels, after adjusting for the effect of age. The RTS,S/AS02 A vaccine also induced high levels of anti-hepatitis B surface antigen antibodies (seroprotection >97%). RTS,S/AS02 A vaccine is immunogenic and induces long-lasting anti-circumsporozoite antibodies, persisting at least 42 months after immunization. These antibodies may play a role in protection against malaria.

The need for potentiating immune responses to recombinant or subunit antigens has prompted GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Biologicals to develop various Adjuvant Systems for the design of prophylactic and therapeutic vaccines. Adjuvant Systems are formulations of classical adjuvants mixed with immunomodulators, specifically adapted to the antigen and the target population. They can activate the appropriate innate immune system and subsequently impact on adaptive immune responses. AS04 is an Adjuvant System that has demonstrated significant achievements in several vaccines against viral diseases. AS02, another Adjuvant System, is being evaluated in various contexts, where a strong T-cell response is needed to afford protection. Likewise, AS01 has been developed for vaccines where the induction of a yet stronger T-cell-mediated immune response is required. Altogether, the promising clinical results strongly support the concept of Adjuvant Systems and allow for further development of new vaccines, best adapted to the target population and the immune mechanisms of protection.

Emergence of antimalarial drugs and insecticides resistance alarms scientists to develop a safe and effective malaria vaccine. A pre-erythrocytic malaria vaccine called RTS,S has made great strides. The review was aimed to assess the safety of the candidate malaria vaccine RTS,S with AS01 and AS02 adjuvants using data from Phase I-III randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs). This systematic review was conducted based on PRISMA 2020. Regardless of time of publication year, all articles related with safety of RTS,S, RCTs published in the English language were included in the study. The last search of databases, and registry was conducted on 30 May, 2022. Pubmed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, Wiley Online Library, and Clinical trials.gov were thoroughly searched for accessible RCTs on the safety of RTS,S malaria vaccine. The studies were screened in three steps: duplicate removal, title and abstract screening, and full-text review. The included studies' bias risk was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for RCTs. This systematic review is registered at Prospero (registration number: CRD42021285888). The qualitative descriptive findings from the included published studies were reported stratified by clinical trial phases. A total of thirty-five eligible safety studies were identified. Injection site pain and swelling, febrile convulsion, fever, headache, meningitis, fatigue, gastroenteritis, myalgia, pneumonia, reactogenicity, and anemia were the most commonly reported adverse events. Despite few clinical trials reported serious adverse events, none of them were related to vaccination. Most of the adverse events observed from RTS,S/AS01 and RTS,S/AS02 malaria vaccines were reported in the control group and shared by other vaccines. Hence, the authors concluded that both RTS,S/AS01 and RTS,S/AS02 malaria vaccines are safe.

The first clinical Phase III trial evaluating a malaria vaccine was completed in December 2013 at 11 sites from seven sub-Saharan African countries. This systematic review assesses data of Phase I-III trials including malaria-naive adults and adults, children and infants from malaria endemic settings in sub-Saharan Africa. The main endpoint of this systematic review was an analysis of the consistency of efficacy and immunogenicity data from respective Phase I-III trials. In addition, safety data from a pooled analysis of RTS/AS Phase II trials and RTS,S/AS01 Phase III trial were reviewed. The RTS,S/AS01 malaria vaccine may become available on the market in the coming year. If so, further strategies should address challenges on how to optimize vaccine efficacy and implementation of RTS,S/AS01 vaccine within the framework of established malaria control measures.

In an attempt to improve the efficacy of the candidate malaria vaccine RTS,S/AS02, two studies were conducted in 1999 in healthy volunteers of RTS,S/AS02 in combination with recombinant Plasmodium falciparum thrombospondin-related anonymous protein (TRAP). In a Phase 1 safety and immunogenicity study, volunteers were randomized to receive TRAP/AS02 (N=10), RTS,S/AS02 (N=10), or RTS,S+TRAP/AS02 (N=20) at 0, 1 and 6-months. In a Phase 2 challenge study, subjects were randomized to receive either RTS,S+TRAP/AS02 (N=25) or TRAP/AS02 (N=10) at 0 and 1-month, or to a challenge control group (N=8). In both studies, the combination vaccine had an acceptable safety profile and was acceptably tolerated. Antigen-specific antibodies, lymphoproliferative responses, and IFN-γ production by ELISPOT assay elicited with the combination vaccine were qualitatively similar to those generated by the single component vaccines. However, post-dose 2 anti-CS antibodies in the RTS,S+TRAP/AS02 vaccine recipients were lower than in the RTS,S/AS02 vaccine recipients. After challenge, 10 of 11 RTS,S+TRAP/AS02 vaccinees, 5 of 5 TRAP/AS02 vaccinees, and 8 of 8 infectivity controls developed parasitemia, with median pre-patent periods of 13.0, 11.0, and 12.0 days, respectively. The absence of any prevention or delay of parasitemia by TRAP/AS02 suggests no apparent added value of TRAP/AS02 as a candidate vaccine. The absence of significant protection or delay of parasitemia in the 11 RTS,S+TRAP/AS02 vaccine recipients contrasts with previous 2 dose studies of RTS,S/AS02. The small sample size did not permit identifying statistically significant differences between the study arms. However, we speculate, within the constraints of the challenge study, that the presence of the TRAP antigen may have interfered with the vaccine efficacy previously observed with this regimen of RTS,S/AS02, and that any future TRAP-based vaccines should consider employing alternative vaccine platforms.

Immunization with RTS,S/AS02 consistently protects some vaccinees against malaria infection in experimental challenges and in field trials. A brief immunization schedule against falciparum malaria would be compatible with the Expanded Programme on Immunization, or in combination with other prevention measures, interrupt epidemic malaria or protect individuals upon sudden travel to an endemic area. We conducted an open label, Phase 2a trial of two different full dose schedules of RTS,S/AS02 in 40 healthy malaria-naïve adults. Cohort 1 ( n = 20) was immunized on a 0, 1, and 3 month schedule and Cohort 2 ( n = 20) on a 0, 7, and 28 day schedule. Three weeks later, 38 vaccinees and 12 unimmunized infectivity controls underwent malaria challenge. Both regimens had a good safety and tolerability profile. Peak GMCs of antibody to the circumsporozoite protein (CSP) were similar in Cohort 1 (78 μg/mL; 95% CI: 45–134) and Cohort 2 (65 μg/mL; 95% CI: 40–104). Vaccine efficacy for Cohort 1 was 45% (95% CI: 18–62%) and for Cohort 2, 39% (95% CI: 11–56%). Protected volunteers had a higher GMC of anti-CSP antibody (114 μg/mL) than did volunteers with a 2-day delay (70 μg/mL) or no delay (30 μg/mL) in the time to onset of parasitemia (Kruskal–Wallis, p = 0.019). A trend was seen for higher CSP-specific IFN-γ responses in PBMC from protected volunteers only in Cohort 1, but not in Cohort 2, for ex vivo and for cultured ELISPOT assays. In malaria-naïve adults, the efficacy of three-dose RTS,S/AS02 regimens on either a 0, 1, and 3 month schedule or an abbreviated 0, 7, and 28 day schedule was not discernibly different from two previously reported trials of two-dose regimens given at 0, 1 month that conferred 47% (95% CI: −19 to 76%) protection and in another trial 42% (95% CI: 5–63%). A strong association of CSP-specific antibody with protection against malaria challenge is observed and confirms similar observations made in other studies. Subsequent trials of adjuvanted RTS,S in African children and infants on a 0, 1, and 2 month schedule have demonstrated a favorable safety and efficacy profile.

The adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine, HB-AS04, elicits more rapid and persistent protective antibody concentrations than double doses of conventional recombinant vaccines in patients with renal insufficiency. We compared the immunogenicity, reactogenicity, and safety of the AS02V-adjuvanted hepatitis B vaccine HB-AS02 with that of HB-AS04. In this phase III, open, randomized study, 151 hepatitis B vaccine-naïve pre-dialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and hemodialysis patients aged 15 years and older received three doses of HB-AS02 at 0, 1, and 6 months. Another 149 similar patients received four doses of HB-AS04 at 0, 1, 2, and 6 months, and all were followed up for 12 months. HB-AS02 elicited more rapid and persistent seroprotection than HB-AS04, with rates of 77 and 39%, respectively, 1 month after the second vaccine dose, and 94 and 79%, respectively, at 12 months. Superiority of HB-AS02 over HB-AS04 in anti-hepatitis B geometric mean concentrations was found at all time points. HB-AS02 was more reactogenic than HB-AS04, but adverse events were mainly transient, of mild to moderate intensity with no reportable vaccine-related serious events. We conclude that a three-dose primary course of HB-AS02 induced more rapid, enhanced, and persistent protection in patients with renal insufficiency than the licensed four-dose primary schedule of HB-AS04. This adjuvanted vaccine affords greater protection with reduced need for booster doses in patients at high risk of hepatitis B infection.

•We demonstrate an AMA1-specific T cell response following vaccination.•The antigen-specific immune response was detectable in an at-risk population in Mali.•A differential pediatric immune response with clinical malaria vaccinees is shown. Based on Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) apical membrane antigen 1 (AMA1) from strain 3D7, the malaria vaccine candidate FMP2.1/AS02A showed strain-specific efficacy in a Phase 2 clinical trial in 400 Malian children randomized to 3 doses of the AMA1 vaccine candidate or control rabies vaccine on days 0, 30 and 60. A subset of 10 Pf(−) (i.e., no clinical malaria episodes) AMA1 recipients, 11 Pf(+) (clinical malaria episodes with parasites with 3D7 or Fab9-type AMA1 cluster 1 loop [c1L]) AMA1 recipients, and 10 controls were randomly chosen for analysis. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) isolated on days 0, 90 and 150 were stimulated with full-length 3D7 AMA1 and c1L from strains 3D7 (c3D7) and Fab9 (cFab9). Production of IFN-γ, TNF-α, IL-2, and/or IL-17A was analyzed by flow cytometry. Among AMA1 recipients, 18/21 evaluable samples stimulated with AMA1 demonstrated increased IFN-γ, TNF-α, and IL-2 derived from CD4+ T cells by day 150 compared to 0/10 in the control group (p<0.0001). Among AMA1 vaccines, CD4+ cells expressing both TNF-α and IL-2 were increased in Pf(−) children compared to Pf(+) children. When PBMCs were stimulated with c3D7 and cFab9 separately, 4/18 AMA1 recipients with an AMA1-specific CD4+ response had a significant response to one or both c1L. This suggests that recognition of the AMA1 antigen is not dependent upon c1L alone. In summary, AMA1-specific T cell responses were notably increased in children immunized with an AMA1-based vaccine candidate. The role of CD4+TNF-α+IL-2+-expressing T cells in vaccine-induced strain-specific protection against clinical malaria requires further exploration. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00460525.