PT  - JOURNAL ARTICLE
AU  - George S Heriot
AU  - Euzebiusz Jamrozik
AU  - Michael J Selgelid
TI  - Tensions between research and public health: modelling the risks and benefits of SARS-CoV-2 vaccine field trials versus human infection challenge studies
AID  - 10.1101/2020.05.18.20106187
DP  - 2020 Jan 01
TA  - medRxiv
PG  - 2020.05.18.20106187
4099  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/27/2020.05.18.20106187.short
4100  - http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/05/27/2020.05.18.20106187.full
AB  - Background Human infection challenge studies (HICS) with SARS-CoV-2 are under consideration as a way of accelerating vaccine development. We evaluate potential vaccine research strategies under a range of epidemic conditions determined, in part, by the intensity of public health interventions.Methods We constructed a compartmental epidemiological model incorporating public health interventions, vaccine efficacy trials and a post-trial population vaccination campaign. The model was used to estimate the duration and benefits of large-scale field trials in comparison with HICS accompanied by an expanded safety trial, and to assess the marginal risk faced by HICS participants.Results Field trials may demonstrate vaccine efficacy more rapidly than a HICS strategy under epidemic conditions consistent with moderate mitigation policies. A HICS strategy is the only feasible option for testing vaccine efficacy under epidemic suppression, and maximises the benefits of post-trial vaccination. Less successful or absent mitigation results in minimal or no benefit from post-trial vaccination, irrespective of trial design.Conclusions SARS-CoV-2 HICS are the optimal method of vaccine testing for populations maintained under epidemic suppression, where vaccination offers the greatest benefits to the local population.Competing Interest StatementThe authors have declared no competing interest.Funding StatementThis research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:N/AAll necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesAll input data and model specifications are provided in the manuscript.