Abstract The East African Community (EAC) grapples with many challenges in tackling infectious disease threats and antimicrobial resistance (AMR), underscoring the importance of regional and robust ...pathogen genomics capacities. However, a significant disparity exists among EAC Partner States in harnessing bacterial pathogen sequencing and data analysis capabilities for effective AMR surveillance and outbreak response. This study assesses the current landscape and challenges associated with pathogen next-generation sequencing (NGS) within EAC, explicitly focusing on World Health Organization (WHO) AMR-priority pathogens. The assessment adopts a comprehensive approach, integrating a questionnaire-based survey amongst National Public Health Laboratories (NPHLs) with an analysis of publicly available metadata on bacterial pathogens isolated in the EAC countries. In addition to the heavy reliance on third-party organizations for bacterial NGS, the findings reveal a significant disparity among EAC member States in leveraging bacterial pathogen sequencing and data analysis. Approximately 97% ( n = 4,462) of publicly available high-quality bacterial genome assemblies of samples collected in the EAC were processed and analyzed by external organizations, mainly in Europe and North America. Tanzania led in-country sequencing efforts, followed by Kenya and Uganda. The other EAC countries had no publicly available samples or had all their samples sequenced and analyzed outside the region. Insufficient local NGS sequencing facilities, limited bioinformatics expertise, lack of adequate computing resources, and inadequate data-sharing mechanisms are among the most pressing challenges that hinder the EAC’s NPHLs from effectively leveraging pathogen genomics data. These insights emphasized the need to strengthen microbial pathogen sequencing and data analysis capabilities within the EAC to empower these laboratories to conduct pathogen sequencing and data analysis independently. Substantial investments in equipment, technology, and capacity-building initiatives are crucial for supporting regional preparedness against infectious disease outbreaks and mitigating the impact of AMR burden. In addition, collaborative efforts should be developed to narrow the gap, remedy regional imbalances, and harmonize NGS data standards. Supporting regional collaboration, strengthening in-country genomics capabilities, and investing in long-term training programs will ultimately improve pathogen data generation and foster a robust NGS-driven AMR surveillance and outbreak response in the EAC, thereby supporting global health initiatives.
Abstract
Background
The Pox-Protein Public-Private Partnership is performing a suite of trials to evaluate the bivalent subtype C envelope protein (TV1.C and 1086.C glycoprotein 120) vaccine in the ...context of different adjuvants and priming agents for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 (HIV-1) prevention.
Methods
In the HIV Vaccine Trials Network 111 trial, we compared the safety and immunogenicity of DNA prime followed by DNA/protein boost with DNA/protein coadministration injected intramuscularly via either needle/syringe or a needle-free injection device (Biojector). One hundred thirty-two healthy, HIV-1–uninfected adults were enrolled from Zambia, South Africa, and Tanzania and were randomized to 1 of 6 arms: DNA prime, protein boost by needle/syringe; DNA and protein coadministration by needle/syringe; placebo by needle/syringe; DNA prime, protein boost with DNA given by Biojector; DNA and protein coadministration with DNA given by Biojector; and placebo by Biojector.
Results
All vaccinations were safe and well tolerated. DNA and protein coadministration was associated with increased HIV-1 V1/V2 antibody response rate, a known correlate of decreased HIV-1 infection risk. DNA administration by Biojector elicited significantly higher CD4+ T-cell response rates to HIV envelope protein than administration by needle/syringe in the prime/boost regimen (85.7% vs 55.6%; P = .02), but not in the coadministration regimen (43.3% vs 48.3%; P = .61).
Conclusions
Both the prime/boost and coadministration regimens are safe and may be promising for advancement into efficacy trials depending on whether cellular or humoral responses are desired.
Clinical Trials Registration
South African National Clinical Trials Registry (application 3947; Department of Health DoH no. DOH-27–0715–4917) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02997969).
DNA and protein coadministration was associated with increased human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) type 1 V1/V2 antibody response. Biojector DNA administration elicited significantly greater CD4+ T-cell responses to HIV envelope protein than needle/syringe in the prime/boost but not the coadministration regimen.