Go to The Journal of Clinical Investigation
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • By specialty
    • COVID-19
    • Cardiology
    • Immunology
    • Metabolism
    • Nephrology
    • Oncology
    • Pulmonology
    • All ...
  • Videos
  • Collections
    • In-Press Preview
    • Resource and Technical Advances
    • Clinical Research and Public Health
    • Research Letters
    • Editorials
    • Perspectives
    • Physician-Scientist Development
    • Reviews
    • Top read articles

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Specialties
  • In-Press Preview
  • Resource and Technical Advances
  • Clinical Research and Public Health
  • Research Letters
  • Editorials
  • Perspectives
  • Physician-Scientist Development
  • Reviews
  • Top read articles
  • About
  • Editors
  • Consulting Editors
  • For authors
  • Publication ethics
  • Publication alerts by email
  • Transfers
  • Advertising
  • Job board
  • Contact

Usage Information

Protection against Plasmodium falciparum malaria by PfSPZ Vaccine
Judith E. Epstein, … , B. Kim Lee Sim, Stephen L. Hoffman
Judith E. Epstein, … , B. Kim Lee Sim, Stephen L. Hoffman
Published January 12, 2017
Citation Information: JCI Insight. 2017;2(1):e89154. https://doi.org/10.1172/jci.insight.89154.
View: Text | PDF
Clinical Research and Public Health Clinical trials Vaccines

Protection against Plasmodium falciparum malaria by PfSPZ Vaccine

  • Text
  • PDF
Abstract

BACKGROUND: A radiation-attenuated Plasmodium falciparum (Pf) sporozoite (SPZ) malaria vaccine, PfSPZ Vaccine, protected 6 of 6 subjects (100%) against homologous Pf (same strain as in the vaccine) controlled human malaria infection (CHMI) 3 weeks after 5 doses administered intravenously. The next step was to assess protective efficacy against heterologous Pf (different from Pf in the vaccine), after fewer doses, and at 24 weeks.

METHODS: The trial assessed tolerability, safety, immunogenicity, and protective efficacy of direct venous inoculation (DVI) of 3 or 5 doses of PfSPZ Vaccine in non-immune subjects.

RESULTS: Three weeks after final immunization, 5 doses of 2.7 × 105 PfSPZ protected 12 of 13 recipients (92.3% [95% CI: 48.0, 99.8]) against homologous CHMI and 4 of 5 (80.0% [10.4, 99.5]) against heterologous CHMI; 3 doses of 4.5 × 105 PfSPZ protected 13 of 15 (86.7% [35.9, 98.3]) against homologous CHMI. Twenty-four weeks after final immunization, the 5-dose regimen protected 7 of 10 (70.0% [17.3, 93.3]) against homologous and 1 of 10 (10.0% [–35.8, 45.6]) against heterologous CHMI; the 3-dose regimen protected 8 of 14 (57.1% [21.5, 76.6]) against homologous CHMI. All 22 controls developed Pf parasitemia. PfSPZ Vaccine was well tolerated, safe, and easy to administer. No antibody or T cell responses correlated with protection.

CONCLUSIONS: We have demonstrated for the first time to our knowledge that PfSPZ Vaccine can protect against a 3-week heterologous CHMI in a limited group of malaria-naive adult subjects. A 3-dose regimen protected against both 3-week and 24-week homologous CHMI (87% and 57%, respectively) in this population. These results provide a foundation for developing an optimized immunization regimen for preventing malaria.

TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02215707.

FUNDING: Support was provided through the US Army Medical Research and Development Command, Military Infectious Diseases Research Program, and the Naval Medical Research Center’s Advanced Medical Development Program.

Authors

Judith E. Epstein, Kristopher M. Paolino, Thomas L. Richie, Martha Sedegah, Alexandra Singer, Adam J. Ruben, Sumana Chakravarty, April Stafford, Richard C. Ruck, Abraham G. Eappen, Tao Li, Peter F. Billingsley, Anita Manoj, Joana C. Silva, Kara Moser, Robin Nielsen, Donna Tosh, Susan Cicatelli, Harini Ganeshan, Jessica Case, Debbie Padilla, Silas Davidson, Lindsey Garver, Elizabeth Saverino, Tooba Murshedkar, Anusha Gunasekera, Patrick S. Twomey, Sharina Reyes, James E. Moon, Eric R. James, Natasha KC, Minglin Li, Esteban Abot, Arnel Belmonte, Kevin Hauns, Maria Belmonte, Jun Huang, Carlos Vasquez, Shon Remich, Mary Carrington, Yonas Abebe, Amy Tillman, Bradley Hickey, Jason Regules, Eileen Villasante, B. Kim Lee Sim, Stephen L. Hoffman

×

Usage data is cumulative from December 2024 through December 2025.

Usage JCI PMC
Text version 2,107 167
PDF 141 52
Figure 373 8
Table 234 0
Supplemental data 185 1
Citation downloads 110 0
Totals 3,150 228
Total Views 3,378
(Click and drag on plot area to zoom in. Click legend items above to toggle)

Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.

Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.

Advertisement

Copyright © 2025 American Society for Clinical Investigation
ISSN 2379-3708

Sign up for email alerts