Browsing by Author "Odhiambo J"

Filter results by typing the first few letters
Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Hybrid versus vaccine immunity of mRNA-1273 among people living with HIV in East and Southern Africa: a prospective cohort analysis from the multicentre CoVPN 3008 (Ubuntu) study.
    (2025-Feb) Garrett N; Tapley A; Hudson A; Dadabhai S; Zhang B; Mgodi NM; Andriesen J; Takalani A; Fisher LH; Kee JJ; Magaret CA; Villaran M; Hural J; Andersen-Nissen E; Ferarri G; Miner MD; Le Roux B; Wilkinson E; Lessells R; de Oliveira T; Odhiambo J; Shah P; Polakowski L; Yacovone M; Samandari T; Chirenje Z; Elyanu PJ; Makhema J; Kamuti E; Nuwagaba-Biribonwoha H; Badal-Faesen S; Brumskine W; Coetzer S; Dawson R; Delany-Moretlwe S; Diacon AH; Fry S; Gill KM; Ebrahim Hoosain ZA; Hosseinipour MC; Inambao M; Innes C; Innes S; Kalonji D; Kasaro M; Kassim P; Kayange N; Kilembe W; Laher F; Malahleha M; Maluleke VL; Mboya G; McHarry K; Mitha E; Mngadi K; Mda P; Moloantoa T; Mutuluuza CK; Naicker N; Naicker V; Nana A; Nanvubya A; Nchabeleng M; Otieno W; Potgieter EL; Potloane D; Punt Z; Said J; Singh Y; Tayob MS; Vahed Y; Wabwire DO; McElrath MJ; Kublin JG; Bekker LG; Gilbert PB; Corey L; Gray GE; Huang Y; Kotze P
    BACKGROUND: With limited access to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines in lower income countries, and people living with HIV (PLWH) largely excluded from clinical trials, Part A of the multicentre CoVPN 3008 (Ubuntu) study aimed to assess the safety of mRNA-1273, the relative effectiveness of hybrid versus vaccine immunity, and SARS-CoV-2 viral persistence among PLWH in East and Southern Africa during the omicron outbreak. METHODS: Previously unvaccinated adults with HIV and/or other comorbidities associated with severe COVID-19 received either one (hybrid immunity) or two (vaccine immunity) 100-mcg doses of ancestral strain mRNA-1273 in the first month, depending on baseline evidence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. In a prospective cohort study design, we used covariate-adjusted Cox regression and counterfactual cumulative incidence methods to determine the hazard ratio and relative risk of COVID-19 and severe COVID-19 with hybrid versus vaccine immunity within six months. The ongoing Ubuntu study is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05168813) and this work was conducted from December 2021 to March 2023. FINDINGS: Between December 2021 and September 2022, 14,237 participants enrolled, and 14,002 (83% PLWH, 69% SARS-CoV-2 seropositive) were included in the analyses. Vaccinations were safe and well tolerated. Common adverse events were pain or tenderness at the injection site (26.7%), headache (20.4%), and malaise (20.3%). Severe adverse events were rare (0.8% of participants after the first and 1.1% after the second vaccination), and none were life-threatening or fatal. Among PLWH, the median CD4 count was 635 cells/μl and 18.5% had HIV viraemia. The six-month cumulative incidences in the hybrid immunity and vaccine immunity groups were 2.02% (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.61-2.44) and 3.40% (95% CI 2.30-4.49) for COVID-19, and 0.048% (95% CI 0.00-0.10) and 0.32% (95% CI 0.59-0.63) for severe COVID-19. Among all PLWH the hybrid immunity group had a 42% lower hazard rate of COVID-19 (hazard ratio [HR] 0.58; 95% CI 0.44-0.77; p < 0.001) and a 73% lower hazard rate of severe COVID-19 (HR 0.27; 95% CI 0.07-1.04; p = 0.056) than the vaccine immunity group, but this effect was not seen among PLWH with CD4 counts <350 cells/μl or HIV viraemia. Twenty PLWH had persistent SARS-CoV-2 virus at least 50 days. INTERPRETATION: Hybrid immunity was associated with superior protection from COVID-19 compared to vaccine immunity with the ancestral mRNA-1273 vaccine. Persistent infections among immunocompromised PLWH may provide reservoirs for emerging variants. FUNDING: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Research capacity building integrated into PHIT projects: leveraging research and research funding to build national capacity.
    (2017-Dec-21) Hedt-Gauthier BL; Chilengi R; Jackson E; Michel C; Napua M; Odhiambo J; Bawah A
    BACKGROUND: Inadequate research capacity impedes the development of evidence-based health programming in sub-Saharan Africa. However, funding for research capacity building (RCB) is often insufficient and restricted, limiting institutions' ability to address current RCB needs. The Doris Duke Charitable Foundation's African Health Initiative (AHI) funded Population Health Implementation and Training (PHIT) partnership projects in five African countries (Ghana, Mozambique, Rwanda, Tanzania and Zambia) to implement health systems strengthening initiatives inclusive of RCB. METHODS: Using Cooke's framework for RCB, RCB activity leaders from each country reported on RCB priorities, activities, program metrics, ongoing challenges and solutions. These were synthesized by the authorship team, identifying common challenges and lessons learned. RESULTS: For most countries, each of the RCB domains from Cooke's framework was a high priority. In about half of the countries, domain specific activities happened prior to PHIT. During PHIT, specific RCB activities varied across countries. However, all five countries used AHI funding to improve research administrative support and infrastructure, implement research trainings and support mentorship activities and research dissemination. While outcomes data were not systematically collected, countries reported holding 54 research trainings, forming 56 mentor-mentee relationships, training 201 individuals and awarding 22 PhD and Masters-level scholarships. Over the 5 years, 116 manuscripts were developed. Of the 59 manuscripts published in peer-reviewed journals, 29 had national first authors and 18 had national senior authors. Trainees participated in 99 conferences and projects held 37 forums with policy makers to facilitate research translation into policy. CONCLUSION: All five PHIT projects strongly reported an increase in RCB activities and commended the Doris Duke Charitable Foundation for prioritizing RCB, funding RCB at adequate levels and time frames and for allowing flexibility in funding so that each project could implement activities according to their trainees' needs. As a result, many common challenges for RCB, such as adequate resources and local and international institutional support, were not identified as major challenges for these projects. Overall recommendations are for funders to provide adequate and flexible funding for RCB activities and for institutions to offer a spectrum of RCB activities to enable continued growth, provide adequate mentorship for trainees and systematically monitor RCB activities.