Assessing public perception of a sand fly biting study on the pathway to a controlled human infection model for cutaneous leishmaniasis

Vivak Parkash, Georgina Jones, Nina Martin, Morgan Steigmann, Elizabeth Greensted, Paul Kaye, Alison M Layton, Charles J Lacey, Vivak Parkash, Georgina Jones, Nina Martin, Morgan Steigmann, Elizabeth Greensted, Paul Kaye, Alison M Layton, Charles J Lacey

Abstract

Background: A controlled human infection model (CHIM) involves deliberate exposure of volunteers to pathogens to assess their response to new therapies at an early stage of development. We show here how we used public involvement to help shape the design of a CHIM to support future testing of candidate vaccines for the neglected tropical disease cutaneous leishmaniasis, a disease transmitted by the bite of infected sand flies in tropical regions.

Methods: We undertook a public involvement (PI) consultation exercise to inform development of a study to test the safety and effectiveness of a sand fly biting protocol using uninfected sand flies (FLYBITE: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT03999970 ) and a CHIM using Leishmania major-infected sand flies (LEISH_Challenge: ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT04512742 ), both taking place in York, UK. We involved 10 members of the public including a patient research ambassador and a previous CHIM volunteer. The session took place at The University of York, UK and examined draft study volunteer-facing material and included the CHIM study design, potential adverse events and therapeutic interventions at study endpoints. A discussion of the scientific, ethical, humanitarian and economic basis for the project was presented to the participants to provoke discourse. An inductive, thematic analysis was used to identify the participants' key concerns.

Results: Themes were identified relating to i) quality of volunteer-facing written information, ii) improving study design, and iii) factors to motivate involvement in the research. Group participants responded positively to the overall study aims. Initial concerns were expressed about potential risks of study involvement, but further explanation of the science and mitigations of risk secured participant support. Participants provided advice and identified improved terminology to inform the volunteer-facing material. Lastly, treatment options were discussed, and excision of any cutaneous lesion was favoured over alternatives as a treatment.

Conclusion: The consultation exercise provided invaluable information which led to improved study design and enhanced clarity in the volunteer-facing material. The session also reinforced the need to maintain public trust in scientific rigour prior to initiation of any study. The investigators hope that this description strengthens understanding of PI in clinical research, and encourages its use within other studies.

Keywords: Clinical study; Controlled human infection model (CHIM); Cutaneous leishmaniasis; Expectations; Leishmania; PI; Public involvement; Qualitative research; human challenge.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests. PK and CJL are co-authors of a patent protecting the gene insert used in the leishmaniasis candidate vaccine ChAd63-KH (Europe 10719953.1; India 315101).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Schematic overview of incorporation of public involvement activities in the LEISH_Challenge project

References

    1. Langberg EM, Dyhr L, Davidsen AS. Development of the concept of patient-centredness – a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2019;102(7):1228–1236. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.023.
    1. Bagley HJ, Short H, Harman NL, Hickey HR, Gamble CL, Woolfall K, et al. A patient and public involvement (PPI) toolkit for meaningful and flexible involvement in clinical trials – a work in progress. Res Involv Engagem. 2016;2:15. Available from: 10.1186/s40900-016-0029-8.
    1. UK Policy Framework for Health and Social Care Research - Health Research Authority [Internet]. [cited 2021 Jan 25]. Available from: .
    1. UK Standards for Public Involvement [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 20]. Available from:
    1. Crocker JC, Ricci-Cabello I, Parker A, Hirst JA, Chant A, Petit-Zeman S, et al. Impact of patient and public involvement on enrolment and retention in clinical trials: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2018:k4738. 10.1136/bmj.k4738.
    1. Jinks C, Carter P, Rhodes C, Beech R, Dziedzic K, Hughes R, Blackburn S, Ong BN. Sustaining patient and public involvement in research: a case study of a research Centre. J Care Serv Manag. 2013;7(4):146–154. doi: 10.1179/1750168715Y.0000000003.
    1. Price A, Albarqouni L, Kirkpatrick J, Clarke M, Liew SM, Roberts N, et al. Patient and public involvement in the design of clinical trials: an overview of systematic reviews. J Eval Clin Pract. 2018;24(1):240–53. 10.1111/jep.12805.
    1. Wyatt K, Carter M, Mahtani V, Barnard A, Hawton A, Britten N. The impact of consumer involvement in research: an evaluation of consumer involvement in the London primary care studies Programme. Fam Pract. 2008;25(3):154–161. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmn019.
    1. Komporozos-Athanasiou A, Thompson M, Fotaki M. Performing accountability in health research: a socio-spatial framework. Hum Relations. 2017;71:1264–1287. doi: 10.1177/0018726717740410.
    1. Levitan B, Getz K, Eisenstein EL, Goldberg M, Harker M, Hesterlee S, Patrick-Lake B, Roberts JN, DiMasi J. Assessing the financial value of patient engagement: a quantitative approach from CTTI’s patient groups and clinical trials project. Ther Innov Regul Sci. 2018;52(2):220–229. doi: 10.1177/2168479017716715.
    1. Bambery B, Selgelid M, Weijer C, Savulescu J, Pollard AJ. Ethical Criteria for Human Challenge Studies in Infectious Diseases. Public Health Ethics. 2016;9:92–103. Available from: .
    1. Darton TC, Blohmke CJ, Moorthy VS, Altmann DM, Hayden FG, Clutterbuck EA, et al. Design, recruitment, and microbiological considerations in human challenge studies. Lancet Infect Dis. 2015;15:840–51. Available from: .
    1. Medlock JM, Hansford KM, Van Bortel W, Zeller H, Alten B. A summary of the evidence for the change in European distribution of phlebotomine sand flies (Diptera: Psychodidae) of public health importance. J Vector Ecol. 2014;39(1):72–77. doi: 10.1111/j.1948-7134.2014.12072.x.
    1. Wall EC, Watson J, Armstrong M, Chiodini PL, Lockwood DN. Epidemiology of imported cutaneous leishmaniasis at the Hospital for Tropical Diseases, London, United Kingdom: use of polymerase chain reaction to identify the species. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2012;86(1):115–8. 10.4269/ajtmh.2012.10-0558.
    1. Roestenberg M, Hoogerwerf M-A, Ferreira DM, Mordmüller B, Yazdanbakhsh M. Experimental infection of human volunteers. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18:e312–22.. Available from: .
    1. Gould VMW, Francis JN, Anderson KJ, Georges B, Cope AV, Tregoning JS. Nasal IgA Provides Protection against Human Influenza Challenge in Volunteers with Low Serum Influenza Antibody Titre. Front Microbiol. 2017;8:900. Available from: .
    1. Newman KL, Marsh Z, Kirby AE, Moe CL, Leon JS. Immunocompetent adults from human norovirus challenge studies do not exhibit norovirus viremia. J Virol. 2015;89:6968–9. Available from: .
    1. Payne RO, Griffin PM, McCarthy JS, Draper SJ. Plasmodium vivax Controlled Human Malaria Infection – Progress and Prospects. Trends Parasitol. 2017;33:141–50. Available from: .
    1. Kirkpatrick BD, Whitehead SS, Pierce KK, Tibery CM, Grier PL, Hynes NA, et al. The live attenuated dengue vaccine TV003 elicits complete protection against dengue in a human challenge model. Sci Transl Med. 2016;8:330ra36. Available from: .
    1. Serafim TD, Coutinho-Abreu IV, Oliveira F, Meneses C, Kamhawi S, Valenzuela JG. Sequential blood meals promote Leishmania replication and reverse metacyclogenesis augmenting vector infectivity. Nat Microbiol. 2018;3:548–55. Available from: .
    1. Peters NC, Bertholet S, Lawyer PG, Charmoy M, Romano A, Ribeiro-Gomes FL, et al. Evaluation of recombinant Leishmania polyprotein plus glucopyranosyl lipid A stable emulsion vaccines against sand fly-transmitted Leishmania major in C57BL/6 mice. J Immunol. 2012;189:4832–41. Available from: .
    1. Ashwin H, Sadlova J, Vojtkova B, Becvar T, Lypaczewski P, Schwartz E, Greensted E, Van Bocxlaer K, Pasin M, Lipinski KS, Parkash V, Matlashewski G, Layton AM, Lacey CJ, Jaffe CL, Volf P, Kaye PM. Characterization of a new Leishmania major strain for use in a controlled human infection model. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):215. 10.1038/s41467-020-20569-3.
    1. What approvals and decisions do I need? - Health Research Authority [Internet]. [cited 2020 Aug 24]. Available from:
    1. Public involvement in clinical trials – INVOLVE [Internet]. [cited 2020 Aug 24]. Available from:
    1. Staniszewska S, Brett J, Simera I, Seers K, Mockford C, Goodlad S, et al. GRIPP2 reporting checklists: tools to improve reporting of patient and public involvement in research. BMJ. 2017:j3453. 10.1136/bmj.j3453.
    1. What is public involvement in research? | INVOLVE [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 9]. Available from:
    1. Reward and recognition for public contributors - a guide to the payment of fees and expenses [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 9]. Available from:
    1. Braun V, Clarke V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol. 2006;3:2:77-101. 10.1191/1478088706qp063oa.
    1. Friese S. Qualitative Data Analysis with ATLAS.ti [Internet]. SAGE Publications; 2019. Available from:
    1. Stricker J, Chasiotis A, Kerwer M, Günther A. Scientific abstracts and plain language summaries in psychology: A comparison based on readability indices. PLoS One. 2020;15(4):e0231160. 10.1371/journal.pone.0231160.
    1. Finlay L. Reflexivity: an essential component for all Research? Br J Occup Ther. 1998.
    1. Oh SS, Galanter J, Thakur N, Pino-Yanes M, Barcelo NE, White MJ, et al. Diversity in clinical and biomedical Research: a promise yet to be fulfilled. PLoS Med. 2015;12(12):e1001918. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001918.
    1. Bruhn FRP, Morais MHF, Bruhn NCP, Cardoso DL, Ferreira F, Rocha CMBM. Human visceral leishmaniasis: factors associated with deaths in Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais state, Brazil from 2006 to 2013. Epidemiol Infect. 2018;146(5):565-70. 10.1017/S0950268818000109.
    1. Kumar A. Pigmentation in Leishmaniasis: common or different. Pigment Disord. 2015;2:5. doi: 10.4172/2376-0427.1000180.
    1. English indices of deprivation 2019 - [Internet]. [cited 2020 Aug 25]. Available from:
    1. McGwire BS, Satoskar AR. Leishmaniasis: clinical syndromes and treatment. QJM. 2014;107(1):7-14. 10.1093/qjmed/hct116.
    1. Thornton H. Patient and public involvement in clinical trials. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):903–904. doi: 10.1136/bmj.39547.586100.80.
    1. Thompson J, Barber R, Ward PR, Boote JD, Cooper CL, Armitage CJ, Jones G. Health researchers' attitudes towards public involvement in health research. Health Expect. 2009;12(2):209-20. 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2009.00532.x.
    1. Gray-Burrows KA, Willis TA, Foy R, Rathfelder M, Bland P, Chin A, et al. Role of patient and public involvement in implementation research: a consensus study. BMJ Qual Saf. 2018;27:858–64. Available from: .
    1. SARS-COV-2 Characterisation Study [COVID-19] - Health Research Authority [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 19]. Available from:
    1. First volunteers in COVID-19 human challenge study leave hospital | News | News & Media | The Royal Free [Internet]. [cited 2021 Apr 19]. Available from:
    1. Gbesemete D, Barker M, Lawrence WT, Watson D, De Graaf H, Read RC. Exploring the acceptability of controlled human infection with SARSCoV2 - a public consultation. BMC Med. 2020;18(1):209. doi: 10.1186/s12916-020-01670-2.
    1. Jamrozik E, Selgelid MJ. Ethical issues surrounding controlled human infection challenge studies in endemic low-and middle-income countries. Bioethics. 2020;34(8):797-808. 10.1111/bioe.12802.
    1. Shah SK, Miller FG, Darton TC, Duenas D, Emerson C, Lynch HF, et al. Ethics of controlled human infection to address COVID-19. Science. 2020;368(6493):832-4. 10.1126/science.abc1076.
    1. Rose SM, Schmit VL, Darton TC, Eyal N, Magalhaes M, Morrison J, et al. Characterizing altruistic motivation in potential volunteers for SARS-CoV-2 challenge trials. medRxiv. 2021. 10.1101/2021.03.14.21253548.

Source: PubMed

Спонсоры и соавторы

Заболевания

Медикаментозные вмешательства

Подписаться