Many global clinical trials primarily estimate a single overall treatment effect. However, when treatment effects are likely to differ between populations, for example due to differences in the disease, population characteristics or health-care systems, this approach can lead to misleading conclusions and raise ethical concerns. Justice is compromised when research conducted in low-resourced countries benefits primarily or exclusively populations of wealthier countries. A clinical trial design and analysis that focuses on estimating a single treatment effect, assumed to apply to all participating populations, goes against the ethical principle of justice and the positions of the World Health Assembly. To address this issue, we suggest a methodological strategy based on hierarchical modelling. This approach enables researchers to estimate treatment effects that are valid for each participating population, while potentially retaining efficiency comparable to traditional pooled analysis, as we demonstrate in an example. When substantial between-population differences exist, it produces valid, region-specific results. Strategies such as this one, if adopted into the standards for global trials, would allow regulators, funders and other stakeholders to ensure that trials are designed to help preserve justice for all participant populations.
Delays in illness recognition, healthcare seeking, and in the provision of appropriate clinical care are common in resource-limited settings. Our objective was to determine the frequency of delays in the "Three Delays-in-Healthcare", and factors associated with delays, among deceased infants and children in seven countries with high childhood mortality. We conducted a retrospective, descriptive study using data from verbal autopsies and medical records for infants and children aged 1-59 months who died between December 2016 and February 2022 in six sites in sub-Saharan Africa and one in South Asia (Bangladesh) and were enrolled in Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance (CHAMPS). Delays in 1) illness recognition in the home/decision to seek care, 2) transportation to healthcare facilities, and 3) the receipt of clinical care in healthcare facilities were categorized according to the "Three Delays-in-Healthcare". Comparisons in factors associated with delays were made using Chi-square testing. Information was available for 1,326 deaths among infants and under 5 children. The majority had at least one identified delay (n = 854, 64%). Waiting >72 hours after illness recognition to seek health care (n = 422, 32%) was the most common delay. Challenges in obtaining transportation occurred infrequently when seeking care (n = 51, 4%). In healthcare facilities, prescribed medications were sometimes unavailable (n = 102, 8%). Deceased children aged 12-59 months experienced more delay than infants aged 1-11 months (68% vs. 61%, P = 0.018). Delays in seeking clinical care were common among deceased infants and children. Additional study to assess the frequency of delays in seeking clinical care and its provision among children who survive is warranted.
Background:Shigella is a leading cause of acute watery diarrhea, dysentery, and diarrhea-attributed linear growth faltering, a precursor to stunting and lifelong morbidity. Several promising Shigella vaccines are in development and field efficacy trials will require a consortium of potential vaccine trial sites with up-to-date Shigella diarrhea incidence data. Methods:The Enterics for Global Health (EFGH) Shigella surveillance study will employ facility-based enrollment of diarrhea cases aged 6-35 months with 3 months of follow-up to establish incidence rates and document clinical, anthropometric, and financial consequences of Shigella diarrhea at 7 country sites (Mali, Kenya, The Gambia, Malawi, Bangladesh, Pakistan, and Peru). Over a 24-month period between 2022 and 2024, the EFGH study aims to enroll 9800 children (1400 per country site) between 6 and 35 months of age who present to local health facilities with diarrhea. Shigella species (spp.) will be identified and serotyped from rectal swabs by conventional microbiologic methods and quantitative polymerase chain reaction. Shigella spp. isolates will undergo serotyping and antimicrobial susceptibility testing. Incorporating population and healthcare utilization estimates from contemporaneous household sampling in the catchment areas of enrollment facilities, we will estimate Shigella diarrhea incidence rates. Conclusions:This multicountry surveillance network will provide key incidence data needed to design Shigella vaccine trials and strengthen readiness for potential trial implementation. Data collected in EFGH will inform policy makers about the relative importance of this vaccine-preventable disease, accelerating the time to vaccine availability and uptake among children in high-burden settings.
BACKGROUND:Hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) has proved ineffective in treating patients hospitalised with Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), but uncertainty remains over its safety and efficacy in chemoprevention. Previous chemoprevention randomised controlled trials (RCTs) did not individually show benefit of HCQ against COVID-19 and, although meta-analysis did suggest clinical benefit, guidelines recommend against its use. METHODS AND FINDINGS:Healthy adult participants from the healthcare setting, and later from the community, were enrolled in 26 centres in 11 countries to a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised trial of COVID-19 chemoprevention. HCQ was evaluated in Europe and Africa, and chloroquine (CQ) was evaluated in Asia, (both base equivalent of 155 mg once daily). The primary endpoint was symptomatic COVID-19, confirmed by PCR or seroconversion during the 3-month follow-up period. The secondary and tertiary endpoints were: asymptomatic laboratory-confirmed Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection; severity of COVID-19 symptoms; all-cause PCR-confirmed symptomatic acute respiratory illness (including SARS-CoV-2 infection); participant reported number of workdays lost; genetic and baseline biochemical markers associated with symptomatic COVID-19, respiratory illness and disease severity (not reported here); and health economic analyses of HCQ and CQ prophylaxis on costs and quality of life measures (not reported here). The primary and safety analyses were conducted in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. Recruitment of 40,000 (20,000 HCQ arm, 20,000 CQ arm) participants was planned but was not possible because of protracted delays resulting from controversies over efficacy and adverse events with HCQ use, vaccine rollout in some countries, and other factors. Between 29 April 2020 and 10 March 2022, 4,652 participants (46% females) were enrolled (HCQ/CQ n = 2,320; placebo n = 2,332). The median (IQR) age was 29 (23 to 39) years. SARS-CoV-2 infections (symptomatic and asymptomatic) occurred in 1,071 (23%) participants. For the primary endpoint the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 was 240/2,320 in the HCQ/CQ versus 284/2,332 in the placebo arms (risk ratio (RR) 0.85 [95% confidence interval, 0.72 to 1.00; p = 0.05]). For the secondary and tertiary outcomes asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infections occurred in 11.5% of HCQ/CQ recipients and 12.0% of placebo recipients: RR: 0.96 (95% CI, 0.82 to 1.12; p = 0.6). There were no differences in the severity of symptoms between the groups and no severe illnesses. HCQ/CQ chemoprevention was associated with fewer PCR-confirmed all-cause respiratory infections (predominantly SARS-CoV-2): RR 0.61 (95% CI, 0.42 to 0.88; p = 0.009) and fewer days lost to work because of illness: 104 days per 1,000 participants over 90 days (95% CI, 12 to 199 days; p < 0.001). The prespecified meta-analysis of all published pre-exposure RCTs indicates that HCQ/CQ prophylaxis provided a moderate protective benefit against symptomatic COVID-19: RR 0.80 (95% CI, 0.71 to 0.91). Both drugs were well tolerated with no drug-related serious adverse events (SAEs). Study limitations include the smaller than planned study size, the relatively low number of PCR-confirmed infections, and the lower comparative accuracy of serology endpoints (in particular, the adapted dried blood spot method) compared to the PCR endpoint. The COPCOV trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov; number NCT04303507. INTERPRETATION:In this large placebo-controlled, double-blind randomised trial, HCQ and CQ were safe and well tolerated in COVID-19 chemoprevention, and there was evidence of moderate protective benefit in a meta-analysis including this trial and similar RCTs. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04303507; ISRCTN Registry ISRCTN10207947.
