Phase 1 FIH studies generally focus on safety and immunogenicity of a vaccine candidate entering clinical development. Evaluation of vaccine efficacy will occur at later stages of clinical development.Pre-proof of concept trials are considered in subjects who are at high risk of an outcome of interest such as Mtb infection. Although Mtb infection may not be seen as a licensable clinical endpoint by a stringent regulatory authority, prevention of infection (POI) would indicate biological activity of vaccine-induced immune response which could be seen as a clinically relevant biological signal and potential indicator of vaccine efficacy. Of note the immunological read-outs used to currently define infection may not be applicable to vaccines that include the antigens used to define Mtb infection.

Another pre-POC pathway is represented by prevention of recurrence (POR) trials in patients recently treated for TB and cured, as these individuals are at high risk of recurrence (by endogenous relapse or exogenous reinfection).

The study design for Phase 2b will reflect the statistical hypothesis: usually superior efficacy over either placebo or benchmark vaccine (e.g. BCG). The magnitude of superiority should reflect the expected improvement in public health outcomes. The preferred primary endpoint for Phase 2b should be bacteriologically confirmed i.e., culture and/or GeneXpert cases of TB disease using standardised case definition (WHO definitions of TB 2014). Culture confirmation or WHO approved rapid diagnostic (WRD) such as Gene Xpert technology-based test is required rather than the less sensitive and less specific smear microscopy.    

TB vaccine target population considerations  

Adolescent/adult vaccine: The study design for Phase 2b will reflect the statistical hypothesis of superior efficacy over placebo as there is no current recommendation for BCG booster immunisation. The magnitude of efficacy should be consistent with an expected substantial impact on the epidemic (Knight et al,).

Neonate/infant vaccine: In infants, testing for superiority of efficacy over BCG will be conducted and the magnitude of superiority should reflect the expected improvement in public health outcomes. Non-inferiority efficacy testing could be considered for an investigational vaccine offering a substantial benefit compared to BCG (eg safety in HIV exposed infants) (ref WHO PPC for New TB Vaccines).The margin of non-inferiority should infer non-inferior impact on public health outcomes.

If a POI study has been conducted, and POI study data show a statistically significant reduction in the defined primary endpoint and meet the Go criteria, one could prepare for a Phase 2b/3 POD trial (depending on magnitude and significance of the result and on an acceptable safety/tolerability profile). However, the absence of a vaccine’s ability to prevent infection does not necessarily mean absence of efficacy in preventing disease as the immune mechanisms by which a vaccine might prevent infection and disease could be different. Also, demonstration of POI does not guarantee POD since approximately 90% of infected individuals never progress to active TB in the absence of effective vaccination. To know that a vaccine will protect people from active TB and avert cases and deaths, it must be demonstrated that a vaccine candidate shown to prevent infection does so in individuals who, without vaccination, would have developed active TB. A convincing robust data package demonstrating pre-clinical and clinical safety, immunogenicity, and pre-POC human data will likely need to be assembled to proceed to Phase 2b. Robust protection data in a relevant animal model might be seen as adequate support even in the absence of pre-POC human efficacy data, although to date, none of the animal models have been demonstrated to be predictive for vaccine protection in humans.

Another approach to obtaining proof of concept is to conduct a Phase 2b POD trial in a population with high risk of disease (to keep size and cost of the trial as low as possible). This could be a QFT-positive adult population, as one example, if the vaccine candidate is hypothesised to prevent disease post-infection.

Primary and secondary endpoints of protective efficacy against TB disease in line with WHO definitions are agreed/ confirmed for the Phase 2b trial.

See Stage F function ‘Clinical Development and Operations’.

The study design for Phase 2b will reflect the statistical hypothesis: usually superior efficacy over either placebo or benchmark vaccine (e.g. BCG). The magnitude of superiority should reflect the expected improvement in public health outcomes. The preferred primary endpoint for Phase 2b should be bacteriologically confirmed i.e., culture and/or GeneXpert cases of TB disease using standardised case definition (WHO definitions of TB 2014). Culture confirmation or WHO approved rapid diagnostic (WRD) such as Gene Xpert technology-based test is required rather than the less sensitive and less specific smear microscopy.    

Analysis of the data from the Phase 2b trial should demonstrate protective efficacy against the primary case definition endpoint that is greater than or equal to the minimum predefined efficacy criterion as set in the TPP, allowing for extending efficacy evaluation in a Phase 3 trial.

Analysis of the data from the Phase 3 trial should confirm protective efficacy against the primary case definition endpoint greater or equal to the minimum predefined efficacy as set in the TPP in the target population for licensure.

Study protocols should be prepared for Phase 4 studies designed to confirm vaccine effectiveness in the target population under field conditions, to evaluate the duration of protection and possible need for booster immunisations.

A study protocol should also be established for Phase 4 effectiveness studies in specific sub-populations e.g. HIV infected populations.  

See also Function ‘Regulatory’

Phase 4 studies to determine vaccine effectiveness are initiated and carried out as planned.