An ethics framework and practical guidance for post-trial access to an RSV maternal vaccine

Respiratory syncytial virus prevention within reach: the vaccine and monoclonal antibody landscape

Respiratory syncytial virus is the second most common cause of infant mortality and a major cause of morbidity and mortality in older adults (aged >60 years). Efforts to develop a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine or immunoprophylaxis remain highly active. 33 respiratory syncytial virus prevention candidates are in clinical development using six different approaches: recombinant vector, subunit, particle-based, live attenuated, chimeric, and nucleic acid vaccines; and monoclonal antibodies. Nine candidates are in phase 3 clinical trials. Understanding the epitopes targeted by highly neutralising antibodies has resulted in a shift from empirical to rational and structure-based vaccine and monoclonal antibody design. An extended half-life monoclonal antibody for all infants is likely to be within 1 year of regulatory approval (from August, 2022) for high-income countries. Live-attenuated vaccines are in development for older infants (aged >6 months). Subunit vaccines are in late-stage trials for pregnant women to protect infants, whereas vector, subunit, and nucleic acid approaches are being developed for older adults. Urgent next steps include ensuring access and affordability of a respiratory syncytial virus vaccine globally. This review gives an overview of respiratory syncytial virus vaccines and monoclonal antibodies in clinical development highlighting different target populations, antigens, and trial results.

Availability of post-trial access in clinical trials: a review of clinical trial protocols submitted to the research ethics board of the University of the Philippines Manila

Objectives: Ethics guidelines such as the Declaration of Helsinki and the CIOMS International Ethical Guidelines for Health-related Research Involving Humans require the sponsors, in cooperation with relevant stakeholders, to provide post-trial access (PTA) to intervention and knowledge, especially in clinical trials held in resource-poor regions. To date, we have very limited knowledge in terms of whether PTA is provided at all, and in what form. To partially address this current limitation, this study wished to explore whether, for which type of drugs and in what form PTA is provided in the Philippines. Methods: We looked at all the clinical trial protocols submitted to the University of the Philippines Manila from 2012 to 2017. A total of 193 clinical trial protocols were included in the study. To identify whether, for which drug type and in what form PTA is provided, we gathered the following information: start and end date of the trial, name of study drug, tested indication of the study drug, region the sponsor is from, type/category of the study drug, type of funding agency, provisions for PTA (yes or no) and the explanation for the provisions. PTA provisions were further described according to the form in which PTA was provided and the types of drugs that were given PTA. Results: Of the 193 protocols, 51.81% indicated PTA, though PTA in the form identified in guidelines can be partially accounted for in only 29.5% (57). The most common form of PTA is the provision or sharing of information (40). None of the protocols provided PTA in the form of access to intervention after the trials, with the possible exemption of 10 protocols that declared future evaluation of the sponsor for PTA depending on patient need, and another seven that might offer the option to transfer to an open-label extension study after the trial. Conclusion: More work is needed if PTA, as stipulated in ethics guidelines, is to be reflected in reality.