Ethical issues surrounding controlled human infection challenge studies in endemic low-and middle-income countries

Controlled human infection challenge studies (CHIs) involve intentionally exposing research participants to, and/or thereby infecting them with, micro-organisms. There have been increased calls for more CHIs to be conducted in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) where many relevant diseases are endemic. This article is based on a research project that identified and analyzed ethical and regulatory issues related to endemic LMIC CHIs via (a) a review of relevant literature and (b) qualitative interviews involving 45 scientists and ethicists with relevant expertise. In this article we argue that though there is an especially strong case for conducting CHIs in endemic (LMIC) settings, certain ethical issues related to the design and conduct of such studies (in such settings) nonetheless warrant particularly careful attention. We focus on ethical implications of endemic LMIC CHIs regarding (a) potential direct benefits for participants, (b) risks to participants, (c) third-party risks, (d) informed consent, (e) payment of participants, and (f) community engagement. We conclude that there is a strong ethical rationale to conduct (well-designed) CHIs in endemic LMICs, that certain ethical issues warrant particularly careful consideration, and that ethical analyses of endemic LMIC CHIs can inform current debates in research ethics more broadly.     

Considerations for stakeholder engagement and COVID‐19 related clinical trials’ conduct in sub‐Saharan Africa

The aim of this study is to determine how stakeholder engagement can be adapted for the conduct of COVID‐19‐related clinical trials in sub‐Saharan Africa. Nine essential stakeholder engagement practices were reviewed: formative research; stakeholder engagement plan; communications and issues management plan; protocol development; informed consent process; standard of prevention for vaccine research and standard of care for treatment research; policies on trial‐related physical, psychological, financial, and/or social harms; trial accrual, follow‐up, exit trial closure and results dissemination; and post‐trial access to trial products or procedures. The norms, values, and practices of collectivist societies in Sub‐Saharan Africa and the low research literacy pose challenges to the conduct of clinical trials. Civil‐society organizations, members of community advisory boards and ethics committees, young persons, COVID‐19 survivors, researchers, government, and the private sector are assets for the implementation and translation of COVID‐19 related clinical trials. Adapting ethics guidelines to the socio‐cultural context of the region can facilitate achieving the aim of stakeholder engagement.     

Judging the social value of controlled human infection studies

In controlled human infection (CHI) studies, investigators deliberately infect healthy individuals with pathogens in order to study mechanisms of disease or obtain preliminary efficacy data on investigational vaccines and medicines. CHI studies offer a fast and cost-effective way of generating new scientific insights, prioritizing investigational products for clinical testing, and reducing the risk that large numbers of people are exposed to ineffective or harmful substances in research or in practice. Yet depending on the pathogen, CHI studies can involve significant risks or burdens for participants, pose risks to individuals or communities not involved in the research, and lead to public controversy. It is therefore essential to ensure that the risks of CHI studies are justified by their social value—that is, their potential to generate benefits for society—and that public trust can be maintained. In this paper, we aim to clarify how research sponsors, research ethics committees and other reviewers should judge the social value of CHI studies. We develop a list of relevant considerations for making social value judgments based on the standard view of social value. We then use this list to discuss the example of potentially conducting dengue virus CHI studies in endemic settings. We argue that dengue virus CHI studies in endemic settings would fall on the higher end of the spectrum of social value, mostly because of their potential to redirect all fields of future dengue research. Drawing on this discussion, we derive several general recommendations for how reviewers should judge the social value of CHI studies.     

Assessment of Humoral Immune Responses to Blood-Stage Malaria Antigens following ChAd63-MVA Immunization,Controlled Human Malaria Infection and Natural Exposure

The development of protective vaccines against many difficult infectious pathogens will necessitate the induction of effective antibody responses. Here we assess humoral immune responses against two antigens from the blood-stage merozoite of the Plasmodium falciparum human malaria parasite – MSP1 and AMA1. These antigens were delivered to healthy malaria-naïve adult volunteers in Phase Ia clinical trials using recombinant replication-deficient viral vectors – ChAd63 to prime the immune response and MVA to boost. In subsequent Phase IIa clinical trials, immunized volunteers underwent controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) with P. falciparum to assess vaccine efficacy, whereby all but one volunteer developed low-density blood-stage parasitemia. Here we assess serum antibody responses against both the MSP1 and AMA1 antigens following i) ChAd63-MVA immunization, ii) immunization and CHMI, and iii) primary malaria exposure in the context of CHMI in unimmunized control volunteers. Responses were also assessed in a cohort of naturally-immune Kenyan adults to provide comparison with those induced by a lifetime of natural malaria exposure. Serum antibody responses against MSP1 and AMA1 were characterized in terms of i) total IgG responses before and after CHMI, ii) responses to allelic variants of MSP1 and AMA1, iii) functional growth inhibitory activity (GIA), iv) IgG avidity, and v) isotype responses (IgG1-4, IgA and IgM). These data provide the first in-depth assessment of the quality of adenovirus-MVA vaccine-induced antibody responses in humans, along with assessment of how these responses are modulated by subsequent low-density parasite exposure. Notable differences were observed in qualitative aspects of the human antibody responses against these malaria antigens depending on the means of their induction and/or exposure of the host to the malaria parasite. Given the continued clinical development of viral vectored vaccines for malaria and a range of other diseases targets, these data should help to guide further immuno-monitoring studies of vaccine-induced human antibody responses.     

Combining community case management and intermittent preventive treatment for malaria

Employment of members of the community to treat malaria is a promising approach to the management of this infection in areas where access to treatment is difficult. Intermittent preventive treatment (IPT) of malaria has recently been shown to be a highly effective way of reducing morbidity from malaria in children living in areas of seasonal malaria transmission, and it can be delivered efficiently by community volunteers. Therefore, we suggest that in areas where malaria transmission is seasonal, and IPT an appropriate malaria intervention in children, community volunteers could be employed to deliver IPT during the peak malaria-transmission season and also to provide community case management during this period and during the rest of the year when occasional cases of malaria continue to occur.     

Health research ethics in malaria vector trials in Africa

Malaria mosquito research in Africa as elsewhere is just over a century old. Early trials for development of mosquito control tools were driven by colonial enterprises and war efforts; they were, therefore, tested in military or colonial settings. The failure of those tools and environmental concerns, coupled with the desperate need for integrated malaria control strategies, has necessitated the development of new malaria mosquito control tools, which are to be tested on humans, their environment and mosquito habitats. Ethical concerns start with phase 2 trials, which pose limited ethical dilemmas. Phase 3 trials, which are undertaken on vulnerable civilian populations, pose ethical dilemmas ranging from individual to community concerns. It is argued that such trials must abide by established ethical principles especially safety, which is mainly enshrined in the principle of non-maleficence. As there is total lack of experience with many of the promising candidate tools (eg genetically modified mosquitoes, entomopathogenic fungi, and biocontrol agents), great caution must be exercised before they are introduced in the field. Since malaria vector trials, especially phase 3 are intrusive and in large populations, individual and community respect is mandatory, and must give great priority to community engagement. It is concluded that new tools must be safe, beneficial, efficacious, effective, and acceptable to large populations in the short and long-term, and that research benefits should be equitably distributed to all who bear the brunt of the research burdens. It is further concluded that individual and institutional capacity strengthening should be provided, in order to undertake essential research, carry out scientific and ethical review, and establish competent regulatory frameworks.     

Exploratory analysis of the effect of helminth infection on the immunogenicity and efficacy of the asexual blood-stage malaria vaccine candidate GMZ2

BackgroundHelminths can modulate the host immune response to Plasmodium falciparum and can therefore affect the risk of clinical malaria. We assessed here the effect of helminth infections on both the immunogenicity and efficacy of the GMZ2 malaria vaccine candidate, a recombinant protein consisting of conserved domains of GLURP and MSP3, two asexual blood-stage antigens of P. falciparum. Controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) was used to assess the efficacy of the vaccine.MethodologyIn a randomized, double-blind Phase I clinical trial, fifty, healthy, lifelong malaria-exposed adult volunteers received three doses of GMZ2 adjuvanted with either Cationic Adjuvant Formulation (CAF) 01 or Alhydrogel, or a control vaccine (Rabies) on days (D) 0, D28 and D56, followed by direct venous inoculation (DVI) of 3,200 P. falciparum sporozoites (PfSPZ Challenge) approximately 13 weeks after last vaccination to assess vaccine efficacy. Participants were followed-up on a daily basis with clinical examinations and thick blood smears to monitor P. falciparum parasitemia for 35 days. Malaria was defined as the presence of P. falciparum parasites in the blood associated with at least one symptom that can be associated to malaria over 35 days following DVI of PfSPZ Challenge. Soil-transmitted helminth (STH) infection was assessed by microscopy and by polymerase chain reaction (PCR) on stool, and Schistosoma infection was assessed by microscopy on urine. Participants were considered as infected if positive for any helminth either by PCR and/or microscopy at D0 and/or at D84 (Helm+) and were classified as mono-infection or co-infection. Total vaccine-specific IgG concentrations assessed on D84 were analysed as immunogenicity outcome.Main findingsThe helminth in mono-infection, particularly Schistosoma haematobium and STH were significantly associated with earlier malaria episodes following CHMI, while no association was found in case of coinfection. In further analyses, the anti-GMZ2 IgG concentration on D84 was significantly higher in the S. haematobium-infected and significantly lower in the Strongyloides stercoralis-infected groups, compared to helminth-negative volunteers. Interesting, in the absence of helminth infection, a high anti-GMZ2 IgG concentration on D84 was significantly associated with protection against malaria.ConclusionsOur results suggest that helminth infection may reduce naturally acquired and vaccine-induced protection against malaria. Vaccine-specific antibody concentrations on D84 may be associated with protection in participants with no helminth infection. These results suggest that helminth infection affect malaria vaccine immunogenicity and efficacy in helminth endemic countries.     

What risks should be permissible in controlled human infection model studies?

Controlled human infection model (CHIM) studies involve the intentional exposure of healthy research volunteers to infectious agents. These studies contribute to knowledge about the cause or development of disease and to the advancement of vaccine research. But they also raise ethical questions about the kinds of risks that should be permissible and whether limits should be imposed on research risks in CHIM studies. Two possible risk thresholds have been considered for CHIM studies. The first suggests constraining ethically permissible risks according to a minimal risk threshold and the second endorses a higher risk threshold that excludes irreversible or fatal infections. I argue that neither of these thresholds is persuasive and situate questions about risk thresholds in CHIM studies within a broader debate about permissible risks in research. I argue that risks in CHIM studies should be constrained according to limits on research risks that do not offer corresponding benefits in all studies rather than developing a unique risk threshold for CHIM studies. I then propose five recommendations for the ethical assessment of risk in CHIM studies.     

The role of community engagement in addressing bystander risks in research: The case of a Zika virus controlled human infection study

There is limited guidance on how to assess the ethical acceptability of research risks that extend beyond research participants to third parties (or “research bystanders”). Community or stakeholder engagement has been proposed as one way to address potential harms to community members, including bystanders. Despite widespread agreement on the importance of community engagement in biomedical research, this umbrella term includes many different goals and approaches, agreement on which is ethically required or recommended for a particular context. We analyse the case of a potential Zika virus human challenge trial to assess whether and how community engagement can help promote the ethical acceptability of research posing risks to bystanders. We conclude that, in addition to having intrinsic value, community engagement can improve the identification of bystander risks, effective approaches to minimizing them, and transparency about bystander risks for host communities.     

The right to withdraw from controlled human infection studies: Justifications and avoidance

The right to withdraw from research without penalty is well established around the world. However, it has been challenged in some corners of bioethics based on concerns about various harms—to participants, to scientific integrity, and to research bystanders—that may stem from withdrawal. These concerns have become particularly salient in emerging debates about the ethics of controlled human infection (CHI) studies in which participants are intentionally infected with pathogens, often in inpatient settings with extensive follow-up. In this article, I provide support for preserving the right to withdraw from research without penalty and demonstrate that it is also typically justified in the specific context of CHI studies. The right is well aligned with individual freedoms outside the research setting, where autonomous individuals are permitted to engage in behaviors that will foreseeably cause them harm; where they cannot be compelled to satisfy contracts for their services, nor penalized for failure to do so; and where their behavior is not constrained by public health authorities except in extreme circumstances. These freedoms are supported by U.S. law, as well as by ethical analysis that is more globally relevant. The problems associated with the right to withdraw, however, remain. The best approach to addressing them is not to restrict the right but rather to avoid initiating research when withdrawal would be especially problematic. If research proceeds, steps can still be taken to minimize participant withdrawal without infringing the right. Investigators can avoid participant surprise through informed consent focused on a study’s most burdensome aspects and promote study completion through financial incentives. Should participants nonetheless seek to withdraw, investigators may attempt to persuade them not to do so by encouraging consideration of the range of potential harms that may result. Researchers conducting CHI studies and other research from which withdrawal might be especially problematic should prepare for the possibility of participant withdrawal, respect participant requests to withdraw without penalty, and incorporate various measures to avoid such requests.     

On the Alleged Right to Participate in High‐Risk Research

Reigning regulatory frameworks for biomedical research impose on researchers and research ethics committees an obligation to protect research participants from risks that are unnecessary, disproportionate to potential research benefits, and non‐minimized. Where the research has no potential to produce results of direct benefit to the subjects and the subjects are unable to give consent, these requirements are strengthened by an additional condition, that risks should not exceed a certain minimal threshold. In this article, I address the question of whether there should be limits of permissible risks in non‐therapeutic research involving competent and healthy subjects. Some commentators argue that competent and informed individuals should have a right to participate even in extremely risky research and that research ethics committees should never reject studies because they are too dangerous. To use David Shaw's expression, competent volunteers should have ‘a right to participate in high‐risk research’. I argue that this idea is ill‐founded, as it does not take into account the social mission and complex collaborative nature of research practice as well as the inequity of power between researchers and subjects. Imposition of limits on permissible risks for healthy volunteers is justified by the need to protect research enterprise and the need to protect the weaker party, namely the subjects. Also, I suggest that the best way to set boundaries on research risks is to leave the judgment of risk acceptability to research ethics committees.     

Selecting participants fairly for controlled human infection studies

Controlled human infection (CHI) studies involve the deliberate exposure of healthy research participants to infectious agents to study early disease processes and evaluate interventions under controlled conditions with high efficiency. Although CHI studies expose participants to the risk of infection, they are designed to offer investigators unique advantages for studying the pathogenesis of infectious diseases and testing potential vaccines or treatments in humans. One of the central challenges facing investigators involves the fair selection of research subjects to participate in CHI studies. While there is widespread agreement that investigators have a duty to select research participants fairly, this principle also yields conflicting ethical imperatives, for example requiring investigators to both exclude potential participants with co-morbidities since they face increased risks, but also to include them in order to ensure generalizability. In this paper we defend an account of fair subject selection that is tailored to the context of CHI studies. We identify the considerations of fairness that bear directly on selecting participants for CHI studies and provide investigators and members of IRBs and RECs with a principled way to navigate the conflicting imperatives to which these considerations give rise.     

Phase 1/2a Trial of Plasmodium vivax Malaria Vaccine Candidate VMP001/AS01B in Malaria-Naive Adults: Safety,Immunogenicity, and Efficacy

Background

A vaccine to prevent infection and disease caused by Plasmodium vivax is needed both to reduce the morbidity caused by this parasite and as a key component in efforts to eradicate malaria worldwide. Vivax malaria protein 1 (VMP001), a novel chimeric protein that incorporates the amino- and carboxy- terminal regions of the circumsporozoite protein (CSP) and a truncated repeat region that contains repeat sequences from both the VK210 (type 1) and the VK247 (type 2) parasites, was developed as a vaccine candidate for global use.

Methods

We conducted a first-in-human Phase 1 dose escalation vaccine study with controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) of VMP001 formulated in the GSK Adjuvant System AS01_B. A total of 30 volunteers divided into 3 groups (10 per group) were given 3 intramuscular injections of 15μg, 30μg, or 60μg respectively of VMP001, all formulated in 500μL of AS01_B at each immunization. All vaccinated volunteers participated in a P. vivax CHMI 14 days following the third immunization. Six non-vaccinated subjects served as infectivity controls.

Results

The vaccine was shown to be well tolerated and immunogenic. All volunteers generated robust humoral and cellular immune responses to the vaccine antigen. Vaccination did not induce sterile protection; however, a small but significant delay in time to parasitemia was seen in 59% of vaccinated subjects compared to the control group. An association was identified between levels of anti-type 1 repeat antibodies and prepatent period.

Significance

This trial was the first to assess the efficacy of a P. vivax CSP vaccine candidate by CHMI. The association of type 1 repeat-specific antibody responses with delay in the prepatency period suggests that augmenting the immune responses to this domain may improve strain-specific vaccine efficacy. The availability of a P. vivax CHMI model will accelerate the process of P. vivax vaccine development, allowing better selection of candidate vaccines for advancement to field trials.     

Research ethics education for community-engaged research: a review and research agenda

Community engagement is increasingly becoming an integral part of research. "Community-engaged research" (CEnR) introduces new stakeholders as well as unique challenges to the protection of participants and the integrity of the research process. We--a group of representatives of CTSA-funded institutions and others who share expertise in research ethics and CEnR--have identified gaps in the literature regarding (1) ethical issues unique to CEnR; (2) the particular instructional needs of academic investigators, community research partners, and IRB members; and (3) best practices for teaching research ethics. This paper presents what we know, as well as what we still need to learn, in order to develop quality research ethics educational materials tailored to the full range of stakeholder groups in CEnR.     

Protecting groups from genetic research

Genetics research, like research in sociology and anthropology, creates risks for groups from which research subjects are drawn. This paper considers what sort of protection for groups from the risks of genetics research should be provided and by whom. The paper categorizes harms by distinguishing process-related from outcome-related harms and by distinguishing two kinds of group harms. It argues that calls for community engagement are justified with respect to some kinds of harms, but not with respect to others; and it cautions that community engagement may itself be harmful.     

The reciprocal influence of the liver and blood stages of the malaria parasite’s life cycle

While the liver and blood stages of the Plasmodium life cycle are commonly regarded as two separate fields of malaria research, several studies have pointed towards the existence of a bidirectional cross-talk, where one stage of mammalian infection may impact the establishment and progression of the other. Despite the constraints in experimentally addressing concurrent liver and blood stage Plasmodium infections, animal models and clinical studies have unveiled a plethora of molecular interactions between the two. Here, we review the current knowledge on the reciprocal influence of hepatic and erythrocytic infection by malaria parasites, and discuss its impacts on immunity, pathology and vaccination against this deadly disease.     

Community Members' Engagement with and Involvement in Genomic Research: Lessons to Learn from the Field

In this paper, we describe the potential role laypersons on ethics committees can play in ensuring community concerns are addressed in the design and implementation of genomic research. We draw inferences from the outcome of an empirical study of the impact of training of laypersons to address community engagement issues in ethics review of research protocol. While this paper does not advocate a particular solution, it describes the importance of community engagement in genomic research, the current limitations there are in engaging communities in the design of these research projects and how communities can be indirectly engaged in the design and implementation of genomic research through the engagement of laypersons on ethics committees. However, to ensure that these laypersons can play this role, their capacity needs to be built to play this role appropriately. There is evidence to show that where resources are invested in building the capacity of laypersons to play their role as community ‘watchdogs’ in research, they play this role aptly. Community engagement is important in genomic research as genomic researchers will increasingly require community perspectives in critical ethics decision making.     

An ethics of anthropology-informed community engagement with COVID-19 clinical trials in Africa

The COVID-19 pandemic has reinforced the critical role of ethics and community engagement in designing and conducting clinical research during infectious disease outbreaks where no vaccine or treatment already exists. In reviewing current practices across Africa, we distinguish between three distinct roles for community engagement in clinical research that are often conflated: 1) the importance of community engagement for identifying and honouring cultural sensitivities; 2) the importance of recognising the socio-political context in which the research is proposed; and 3) the importance of understanding what is in the interest of communities recruited to research according to their own views and values. By making these distinctions, we show that current practice of clinical research could draw on anthropology in ways which are sometimes unnecessary to solicit local cultural values, overlook the importance of socio-political contexts and wider societal structures within which it works, potentially serving to reinforce unjust political or social regimes, and threaten to cast doubt on the trustworthiness of the research. We argue that more discerning anthropological engagement as well as wider collaboration with other social scientists and those working in the humanities is urgently needed to improve the ethics of current biomedical and pharmaceutical research practice in Africa.     

Engaging the community in research: lessons learned from the malaria vaccine trial

When staff of the Papua New Guinea Institute of Medical Research first went into Wosera in 1979, to try and interest the community into participating in malaria research, the traditional warning sign of crossed bamboo sticks constantly blocked their path as they tried to enter the villages. In 2003, the site is a thriving research centre, with many projects under its belt, a successfully executed malaria vaccine trial to its credit, and approximately 13000 people from 29 villages currently participating in demographic surveillance and various research projects. It has been a long road from community suspicion to sustainable community participation, and the field workers have learned many important lessons along the way that can be applicable to research programs in other disease-endemic areas.