Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39206274›Full record

ArticleF1000Research2024

GBS vaccines in the UK: a round table discussion.

Natasha Thorn, Rebecca L Guy, Konstantinos Karampatsas, Mair Powell, Kate F Walker, Jane Plumb, Asma Khalil, Vanessa Greening, Emma Eccleston, Caroline Trotter and 6 more

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in F1000Research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

16 authors.

Natasha ThornSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0391-7677
Rebecca L GuyUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5500-5691
Konstantinos KarampatsasSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Mair PowellHealthcare Products Regulatory Agency, Dublin, Ireland.
Kate F WalkerUniversity of Nottingham, Nottingham, England, UK.
Jane PlumbGroup B Strep Support (GBSS), Haywards Heath, UK.
Asma KhalilSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Vanessa GreeningSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Emma EcclestonSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Caroline TrotterImperial College London, London, England, UK.
Nick AndrewsUK Health Security Agency, London, UK.
Lynne RushPublic Health Scotland, Edinburgh, UK.
Claire SharkeySt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.
Lauren WallisSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0006-1787-9025
Paul HeathSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7540-7433
Kirsty Le DoareSt George's University of London, London, SW17 0RE, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5104-085X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Group B streptococcus (GBS) remains a leading cause of infant sepsis, meningitis and death despite intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis. A vaccine is urgently required, and two candidates are in advanced clinical trials. For successful GBS vaccine implementation, especially if a vaccine is licensed based on an immunological threshold, there must be cross-sector engagement, effective advocacy, robust plans for phase IV studies and equitable access. Meeting: A round-table discussion, held at St George's University of London, reviewed the current position of GBS vaccines in the UK context, focusing on phase IV plans, convening a diverse group of stakeholders from across the UK, with a role in GBS vaccine licensure, advocacy, implementation or effectiveness evaluation.Presentations outlined the latest UK epidemiology, noting the rising infant invasive GBS (iGBS) infection rates from 1996 to 2021 for both early and late onset disease, with the highest disease rates in Black infants (1.1/1000 livebirths vs white infants (0.81/1000 livebirths). Potential coverage of the candidate vaccines was high (>95%). Regulatory input suggested that EU regulators would consider waiving the need for a pre-licensure efficacy study if a putative correlate of protection could be adequately justified. Phase IV study methodologies for a GBS vaccine were considered, largely based on previous UK maternal vaccine assessments, such as a nationwide cohort study design using a vaccine register and a maternal services dataset. Other strategies were also discussed such as a cluster or stepped-wedge randomised trial to evaluate implementation outcomes. Opportunities for advocacy, education and engagement with additional key partners were discussed and identified. Conclusions: With an approved GBS vaccine a near possibility, planning of phase IV studies and identification of critical barriers to implementation are urgently needed. Cross-sector engagement is essential and will facilitate a successful pathway.

Indexed as

Streptococcal InfectionsStreptococcal VaccinesStreptococcus agalactiaeFemaleHumansUnited KingdomStreptococcal Vaccinesearly-onset diseaseGroup B streptococcusinvasive GBS diseaselate-onset diseasematernal vaccinesneonatevaccines

Identifiers

PMID39206274
PMCPMC11350325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.