MalariaPhase 1NCT00121771
Malaria Candidate Vaccines FP9 Circumsporozoite (CS) and MVA CS in Adult Gambian Men
A Phase 1 study testing FP9 CS and MVA CS in people with Malaria, run by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine at 1 site in The Gambia.
Trial summary
Animal and human studies have shown that the prime-boost immunization strategy using malaria antigens expressed in plasmid or viral vectors induces strong cellular immune responses. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 45 years, men onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Malaria
- What is being tested?
- FP9 CS and MVA CS
- How many people
- 32 participants
- Where
- 1 siteThe Gambia
- Study dates
- Jan 2004to Jul 2004
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 45 years
- Men only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Healthy adult male aged 18-45 years
Who cannot join
- Clinically significant history of skin disorder (eczema, psoriasis, etc.), allergy, immunodeficiency, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, endocrine disorder, liver disease, renal disease, gastrointestinal disease or neurological illness
- Any clinical evidence of immunosuppression such as oral candida, stomatitis, aphthous or septic ulceration, septic skin lesions or any clinical or laboratory evidence of infection or immunocompromise
- History of splenectomy
- Haematocrit of less than 30%
- Serum creatinine concentration >130mmol/L
- Serum ALT concentration >42IU/L
Show all 12Show fewer
- Blood transfusion within one month of the beginning of the study
- Administration of any other vaccine or immunoglobulin within two weeks before scheduled MVA vaccination
- Positive HIV antibody test
- Current participation in another clinical trial, or within 12 weeks of this study
- Any other finding which, in the opinion of the investigators, would increase the risk of an adverse outcome from participation in the trial
- Likelihood of travel away from the study area for the duration of the study
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
The Gambia1 site
Medical Research Council Laboratories
Banjul, P.O.Box 273, Banjul
About this study
Official title: A Phase 1 Trial of the Malaria Candidate Vaccines FP9 CS and MVA CS in Adult Gambian Men Aged 18 - 45 Years
Animal and human studies have shown that the prime-boost immunization strategy using malaria antigens expressed in plasmid or viral vectors induces strong cellular immune responses. An immunization regimen with the malaria vaccines DNA ME-TRAP followed by MVA ME-TRAP induced strong T cell responses in adults in the United Kingdom (UK) and in the Gambia but did not provide significant clinical protection against infection. The investigators assessed two new vaccines which utilize a similar immunization strategy but a different malaria antigen, a circumsporozoite (CS) protein. The entire CS protein was expressed either in a modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) CS, or an attenuated fowlpox virus strain (FP9) CS.
Read the detailed description
Objectives:
The primary aim was the assessment of safety and reactogenicity of these vaccines in Gambian adults. The secondary aim was the assessment of immunogenicity and comparison with UK adults given the same vaccines.
Study Area:
The study was conducted in the town of Farafenni, about 200km east of the capital city, Banjul. In this area, malaria is highly seasonal with an entomological inoculation rate between 10-50 bites per year. This study was carried out from January to June, when the incidence of malaria is low.
Study Population:
The study involved 32 healthy Gambian adults aged 18-45 years. Volunteers were subjected to a thorough physical and medical examination. Exclusion criteria included a low PCV (< 30%); raised plasma creatinine or ALT levels; and HIV positivity, as determined by ELISA assays.
Study Procedure:
After prior consultations with community leaders, public meetings were held to inform the community of the planned study. Volunteers aged 18-45 years were then invited to take part in the study after written informed consent was obtained in the presence of the principal investigator. Prior to the start of the screening exercise, the investigators checked the age and identity of each volunteer and conducted pre-HIV test counselling. Screening involved a thorough physical examination, blood sampling for haematological (full blood count, packed cell volume [PCV]), renal (plasma creatinine) and hepatic (alanine aminotransferase) tests and HIV 1 and 2 testing by ELISA. All eligible volunteers were issued unique study numbers and photo identification cards.
The initial part of the study was designed to determine the dose and safety of the individual vaccines using an open-label dose escalation method. Study volunteers were randomly allocated to two groups of four that received 5 x 10^7 pfu id of either FP9 CS or MVA CS. When a good safety profile was evident one week after this dose, another set of four volunteers per group received a higher dose (1 x 10^8 pfu id) of FP9 CS or MVA CS. After the investigators had achieved a satisfactory safety profile with a higher dose of both vaccines given alone, they proceeded to administer the vaccines in combination using the heterologous prime-boost regime. The vaccines were administered at 4-week intervals. Eight volunteers received FP9 CS at week 0 followed by MVA CS at week 4 (FM group). Another set of 8 volunteers received FP9 CS at weeks 0 and 4, followed by MVA CS at week 8 (FFM). Following vaccination, volunteers were observed for 1 hour and given a course of antipyretic (paracetamol) to take if required. A physician and a study nurse could be contacted by the volunteers at anytime during the course of the study. In addition, home visits were made by field workers on days 1, 2, 7 and 28, after each vaccination, to record adverse events using a standard questionnaire.
Sample Size:
Sample size was determined by the requirement to make a preliminary evaluation of inter-group and inter-individual variability, to avoid excessive risk and to allow for a realistic workload. Statistical significance may not be reached in this study with low power, but a non-significant finding would provide justification for the need for a study with greater power.
Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB):
An international DSMB was established to monitor the conduct of the trial and to approve the analytical plan. The trial was conducted in line with the ICH Good Clinical Practices guidelines and with the Medical Research Council (MRC) rules and regulations for the conduct of clinical trials.
- Conditions
- Malaria
- Being tested
- FP9 CS, MVA CS
- Keywords
- Malaria, Vaccines, Safety, Immunogenicity
- Medical subject headings
- Malaria
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
FP9 CSBiological
MVA CSBiological
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Safety and immunogenicity
Secondary outcomes (1)
Comparison of immunogenicity with non-immune UK adults
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted21 Jul 2005 (estimated)
- Study startJan 2004
- Study completionJul 2004
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for MalariaStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 32 participants
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Medical Research Council, University of Oxford
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Brian Greenwood, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine
- Investigators
- Adrian VS Hill, MD, Phd, Study chair, Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00121771
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- ITDCVG28
- Other IDs
- VAC 026
- Status last verified
- Jan 2017
- First submitted
- 18 Jul 2005
- Last updated
- 12 Jan 2017
- Results posted
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 Jan 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Phase 1 Trial of the Malaria Candidate Vaccines FP9 CS and MVA CS in Adult Gambian Men Aged 18 - 45 Years
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00121771
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ITDCVG28
- Conditions
- Malaria
- Keywords
- Malaria, Vaccines, Safety, Immunogenicity
- Phase
- Phase 1
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 32 participants
- Lead sponsor
- London School of Hygiene and Tropical MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Medical Research Council, University of Oxford
- Study start
- Jan 2004
- Study completion
- Jul 2004
- First posted
- 21 Jul 2005 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Animal and human studies have shown that the prime-boost immunization strategy using malaria antigens expressed in plasmid or viral vectors induces strong cellular immune responses. An immunization regimen with the malaria vaccines DNA ME-TRAP followed by MVA ME-TRAP induced strong T cell responses in adults in the United Kingdom (UK) and in the Gambia but did not provide significant clinical protection against infection. The investigators assessed two new vaccines which utilize a similar immunization strategy but a different malaria antigen, a circumsporozoite (CS) protein. The entire CS protein was expressed either in a modified vaccinia virus Ankara (MVA) CS, or an attenuated fowlpox virus strain (FP9) CS.
Detailed description
Objectives:
The primary aim was the assessment of safety and reactogenicity of these vaccines in Gambian adults. The secondary aim was the assessment of immunogenicity and comparison with UK adults given the same vaccines.
Study Area:
The study was conducted in the town of Farafenni, about 200km east of the capital city, Banjul. In this area, malaria is highly seasonal with an entomological inoculation rate between 10-50 bites per year. This study was carried out from January to June, when the incidence of malaria is low.
Study Population:
The study involved 32 healthy Gambian adults aged 18-45 years. Volunteers were subjected to a thorough physical and medical examination. Exclusion criteria included a low PCV (< 30%); raised plasma creatinine or ALT levels; and HIV positivity, as determined by ELISA assays.
Study Procedure:
After prior consultations with community leaders, public meetings were held to inform the community of the planned study. Volunteers aged 18-45 years were then invited to take part in the study after written informed consent was obtained in the presence of the principal investigator. Prior to the start of the screening exercise, the investigators checked the age and identity of each volunteer and conducted pre-HIV test counselling. Screening involved a thorough physical examination, blood sampling for haematological (full blood count, packed cell volume [PCV]), renal (plasma creatinine) and hepatic (alanine aminotransferase) tests and HIV 1 and 2 testing by ELISA. All eligible volunteers were issued unique study numbers and photo identification cards.
The initial part of the study was designed to determine the dose and safety of the individual vaccines using an open-label dose escalation method. Study volunteers were randomly allocated to two groups of four that received 5 x 10^7 pfu id of either FP9 CS or MVA CS. When a good safety profile was evident one week after this dose, another set of four volunteers per group received a higher dose (1 x 10^8 pfu id) of FP9 CS or MVA CS. After the investigators had achieved a satisfactory safety profile with a higher dose of both vaccines given alone, they proceeded to administer the vaccines in combination using the heterologous prime-boost regime. The vaccines were administered at 4-week intervals. Eight volunteers received FP9 CS at week 0 followed by MVA CS at week 4 (FM group). Another set of 8 volunteers received FP9 CS at weeks 0 and 4, followed by MVA CS at week 8 (FFM). Following vaccination, volunteers were observed for 1 hour and given a course of antipyretic (paracetamol) to take if required. A physician and a study nurse could be contacted by the volunteers at anytime during the course of the study. In addition, home visits were made by field workers on days 1, 2, 7 and 28, after each vaccination, to record adverse events using a standard questionnaire.
Sample Size:
Sample size was determined by the requirement to make a preliminary evaluation of inter-group and inter-individual variability, to avoid excessive risk and to allow for a realistic workload. Statistical significance may not be reached in this study with low power, but a non-significant finding would provide justification for the need for a study with greater power.
Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB):
An international DSMB was established to monitor the conduct of the trial and to approve the analytical plan. The trial was conducted in line with the ICH Good Clinical Practices guidelines and with the Medical Research Council (MRC) rules and regulations for the conduct of clinical trials.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 45 years
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Healthy adult male aged 18-45 years
Key exclusion criteria (12 listed)
- Clinically significant history of skin disorder (eczema, psoriasis, etc.), allergy, immunodeficiency, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, endocrine disorder, liver disease, renal disease, gastrointestinal disease or neurological illness
- Any clinical evidence of immunosuppression such as oral candida, stomatitis, aphthous or septic ulceration, septic skin lesions or any clinical or laboratory evidence of infection or immunocompromise
- History of splenectomy
- Haematocrit of less than 30%
- Serum creatinine concentration >130mmol/L
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| FP9 CS | Biological | – |
| MVA CS | Biological | – |
Primary outcome
Safety and immunogenicity
1 secondary outcome
Comparison of immunogenicity with non-immune UK adults
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 12 Jan 2017.
Related trials for Malaria
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Trajectories and Mechanisms of Recovery From Malaria: An Observational Study
Malaria
Not yet recruiting
Positron Emission Tomography and Organ-Specific Changes in Participants Co-Enrolled in NIH Studies of Plasmodium Vivax Controlled Human Malaria Infection
Healthy Volunteer, Malaria
Recruiting
The Effects of Iron Treatment on Vaccine Immunogenicity in Kenyan Infants With Iron Deficiency
Iron Deficiencies
RecruitingObservational study
Host and Parasite Factors That Influence Susceptibility to Malaria Infection and Disease During Pregnancy and Early Childhood in Ouelessebougou and Bamako, Mali
Malaria
RecruitingPhase 1
Safety, Tolerability and Efficacy of PfSPZ-LARC2 Vaccine Against CHMI in Malaria-Naïve Adults
Malaria Falciparum
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Adrian VS Hill, MD, Phd study chair
Centre for Human Genetics, University of Oxford
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 1 study testing FP9 CS and MVA CS in people with Malaria, run by London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine at 1 site in The Gambia.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 12 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 12 Jan 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in The Gambia. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 1 studies test a treatment in a small group of people for the first time or in a new way, mainly to check safety and find the right dose.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Safety and immunogenicity. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 12 Jan 2017.