Active Infection & Immunity Public Health & Healthcare

Rising to the Strep A human challenge: Investigating protection against experimental human infection to predict vaccine efficacy.

In plain English

AI plain-English summary

A Strep A human infection study—the world’s only one—will now be run in Australia and The Gambia to directly test how well immune responses protect people against this bacterium. Strep A causes everything from sore throats to life-threatening invasive disease, yet no vaccine exists. A major barrier is that researchers lack standardised tests to measure protection—they cannot tell which immune responses actually prevent infection. This project tackles that gap head-on by deliberately infecting volunteers with Strep A under controlled conditions, then using a curated set of standardised immunoassays to pinpoint the specific antibodies and cellular responses that correlate with protection. The work is guided by infectious disease data scientists and an industry advisory group. If successful, this research will deliver validated immunoassays and a clear correlate of protection—the missing piece that has stalled vaccine development for decades. That would allow vaccine developers to run smaller, faster trials, accelerate regulatory approval, and ultimately get a Strep A vaccine into widespread use. The impact is global: a vaccine could prevent millions of cases of rheumatic heart disease, kidney damage, and invasive infections each year, especially in low-resource settings where Strep A burden is highest.

View original technical description
There is a compelling case for vaccine development targeting the immense global burden of disease caused by the human-restricted pathogen Streptococcus pyogenes (‘group A strep’ or ‘StrepA’). Despite widespread enthusiasm for the mission, developers are acutely aware that the StrepA vaccine ecosystem remains fragile. As highlighted in the 2018 WHO StrepA vaccine roadmap, the lack of standardised immunoassays and a correlate of protection are key impediments to development. Our team of StrepA research leaders have established several cohort studies and the world’s only StrepA human infection study, which have changed the vaccine development landscape and advanced understanding of human immune responses to StrepA. Here, we will run human infection studies in Australia and The Gambia, tuned to demonstrate protection, with samples tested in a curated set of standardised immunoassays to define humoral and cellular correlates of protection. The overall design and analysis will be guided by leading infectious diseases data scientists and informed by an ‘Industry and Innovation’ advisory group. This program will deliver standardised immunoassays, directly assess protection in human infection studies, and use powerful data analytics and exploratory immunology techniques to realise the potential of correlates of protection to accelerate StrepA vaccines towards trials, licensure, and use.

View the original record at the funder ↗

Researchers

Andrew Steer (EPMC Awardee)Danika Hill (EPMC Awardee)David Khoury (EPMC Awardee)Ed Clarke (EPMC Awardee)Hannah Frost (EPMC Awardee)Joshua Osowicki (EPMC Awardee)Michael Marks (EPMC Awardee)Nicole Moreland (EPMC Awardee)Penda Johm (EPMC Awardee)Thushan de Silva (EPMC Awardee)Ya Jankey Jagne (EPMC Awardee)

Related Research

Grants with similar aims, by meaning.

GAS Immuno-T: Development of a standardised immunity test to Group A Streptococcus
Development of a Universal Group A Streptococcus Glycoconjugate Vaccine
Strep A Vaccine Global Consortium 2.0: Paving a path for development of a Strep A vaccine
Does humoral immunity to candidate-vaccine antigens protect from Group A Streptococcus colonisation and disease in a longitudinal household cohort study in The Gambia?
Investigating human immune responses to Staphylococcus aureus skin infection to accelerate vaccine development

Original classification

Identifying correlates of protection to support vaccine development

Plain English summaries and category classifications on this site are generated by AI and may not perfectly reflect the original research.