The Largest Recorded Ebola Hemorrhagic Fever - Report Example

Name: Professor: Subject: Date: Critical Review Summary The largest recorded EHF (Ebola hemorrhagic fever) outbreak resulting from EBOV (Ebola virus) begun in the rural part of Guinea towards the end of 2013 and spread across the neighboring countries of Liberia and Sierra Leone (1). Globally, the reported cases of Ebola stands at 27,200 with over 11,100 reported deaths (10). The lack of the capacity to ensure timely recruitment as well as adequate logistic, financial, and medical support is a serious problem in the fight against Ebola (3). The Ebola outbreak therefore, gives emphasis to the importance of developing vaccines and therapeutics to ensure the aversion of the outbreak (4). There have been various experiments on vaccines conducted with the most promising one being that of recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus platform expression the GP (glocoprotein) of Ebola (6). In this case, VSV-EBOV is perceived to immunogenic. The diagram below describes pathogenesis. VSV-EBOV is perceived to be a live-attenuated vector of vaccine that has revealed a satisfactory preclinical safety profile as well as a clear efficacy in post- and pre-exposure in macaque and rodent models (6). VSV-EBOV has generally been shown to be an effective dose calling for a further evaluation to ascertain its efficacy. Other vaccine trials are still in their preliminary phases; therefore, it is prudent to assume that VSV-EBOV is likely to ensure the protection of against all the strains of EBOV (8). However, data analysis within Sierra Leone reveals a high rate of mutation in the outbreak and this is raising apprehension regarding how applicable is the present experimental strategies of intervention including VSV-EBOV against the emerged strain of EBOV-Makona (10). However, the recent data drawn from Mali between October to November of 2014 provides an indication that the rate of mutation of EBOV within West Africa as being similar to what was observed in the outbreaks in the past, reducing the concerns. The study investigated the time to ensure the protection of the immunity following a single high dose vaccination with VSV-EBOV compared to the experiment with the strain of EBOV-Makona (16). The experiment involved infectious animals and the work was conducted in a highly containment lab at the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, Rocky Mountain Laboratories, and the Division of Intramural Research, ensuring the application of the standard protocol of operation with the approval from the Institutional Biosafety Committee (15). A total of 15 different macaques were offered two to three animals and at the same time immunized with one intramuscular injection comprising of GMP-grade VSV-EBOV at approximately 28,21, 14, 7, as well as 3 days prior to the challenge. The dose appeared to be equal to the highest dose of immunization whose evaluation occurred in the latest clinical trials in phase one (10). Three animals that acted as the control group had their immunization done 28 day prior to the challenge and similar routine was used and in the case of the control group, there was the utilization of virus vaccine called VSV-MARV (VSV-Marburg) that had previously shown not to ensure the protection against EBOV challenge (14). The day to day monitoring which included weekly sampling of the blood as well as the animals’ clinical examination provided a revelation of usual behavior as well as no noticeable adverse effect following the vaccination (13). There was the intensification of the clinical examination as well as health monitoring and this continued until euthanasia was essential or 42 days following the challenge owing to the disease severity. The control group of animals that had been vaccinated with VSV-MARV as well as a single animal in the three day group of vaccination developed severe form of EHF characterized by macular cutaneous rash, increased level of liver enzymes, thrymbocytopemia, and viremia.on days 5, 7, 7, as well as 8, following the challenge (11). The animal that was put under the day-3 group of vaccination developed various moderate EHF signs such as mild rash and viremia, but failed to reach the clinical score for euthanasia of humane end-point, but instead ensured the clearance of the virus by the end of the ninth day, and eventually survived. Animal number three within this group developed very minor disease signs that lacked rash or viremia, and the recovery rate was quick. The other animals in the other days namely 28, 21, 14, and 7 groups of vaccination failed to develop the disease’s clinical sign , did not show abnormal hematology or liver enzyme changes, and also EBOV viremia, and this is a clear indication that they were protected against the challenge of EBOV-Makona (10). The cellular immune responses’ role to ensure the protection lack the clarity in the establishment and the responses of the CD8 and CD4 T cell are practically undetected at the challenge period or during the immunization. Therefore, the focus here was the response of the antibodies within the vaccinated animals. As expected, the control group of animals that were vaccinated with VSV-EBOV failed to develop any form of EBOV-GP specific responses of IgG. The study revealed that the animals that show neutralizing antibodies at the challenge time were those vaccinated on the ‘day-28, -21, as well as -14’. For the group of the day-28, the sera neutralizing activity appeared to be similar to the one that was reported in the previous studies. There was also the measurement of the systematic levels of numerous chemokine, cytokines, as well as other soluble factors in the infected animals’ serum (10). An aberrant chemokine and cytokine response is perceived to be the symbol of lethal or severe EHF in the model of macaque in human beings. The study showed that VSV-EBOV vaccinated animals had undetected cytokine and chemokine levels, an indication of efficacy in the EBOV replication control. The low VSV-EBOV levels are linked to the VSV-EBOV vaccination within humans and NHPs (7). VSV is perceived to be an inducer of IFN responses of type one. With the exemption of animals vaccinated under day-3 that had RNA levels equivalent to 1 to 6 PFY and specific to VSV, all the NHPs that were vaccinated at the challenge time had their VSV cleared. However, the period to ensure the immunity of VSV-EBOV is usually short, ensuring the provision of limited protection against diseases that are lethal even when the administration of the same occurs 3 days prior to the challenge (9). Critical Review The paper has some originality because it is giving a report of the research done on the efficacy of VSV-EBOV in the fight against Ebola virus. The title is properly done since the author has adhered to ensuring the maximum word count that should not exceed 14 words. Apart from that, the title of the article is leading the audience to expect that VSV-EBOV has the capacity to ensure the protection of macaques against the various infections in cases of Ebola virus and this is captured in the paper. The intended audience for this paper is the various individuals involved in coming up with the vaccine aimed at eradicating Ebola as well as the general public who are to benefit from this vaccine. In addition, the study will also benefit the governments of the country where Ebola outbreak is rampant, such as in Sierra Leone as well as Liberia. The purpose of the author is to create the awareness that VSV-EBOV vaccine has the capacity to ensure the protection of macaques against infection following the outbreak of Ebola virus between 2014 and 2015. Although various important terms exist in the article, the author does not define them. The author, however, compares the research with the previously done research, and this is essential in enhancing the clarity of the findings. The information offered by the article is fact since it has been proved. The article provides the information about the various experiments done to ascertain the efficacy of VSV-EBOV in acting as a vaccine for Ebola virus. Apart from that, the information is well researched because numerous studies and control groups are done to ascertain the information. The study evaluates the clinical trials within phase one in human beings to ascertain the efficacy of VSV-EBOV as a vaccine. The finding reveals that VSV-EBOV Makona is an effective vaccine in the fight against Ebola compared to VSV-MARC (12). This was proved through the use of various animals as both the experiment as well as control group. Although the author fails to include the various sub-topics, they have clearly provided a well-documented conclusion. Although the flow of the information is continuous, the author does not provide the reader with the various sections such as the abstract, the introduction, the literature review, among other part. The report appears as a continuous clause although it has logical flow of information. The flow of the information is clear with one argument leading to the next. Apart from that, the title is direct related to the information provided in the article. The research incorporates both the primary as well as the secondary sources. However, the introduction is too long and ought to be shortened but the writings are clear as well as concise. The primary sources in this case are the study groups that are included while the secondary sources are the various books and other academic materials that the authors use to strengthen their claim. The research is original because it involves an experiment on various animals in comparison with the control group. Although the authors fail to indicate the sub-titles, the different sections such as the introduction, the body, the results, the discussion, and the conclusion can clearly be identified and are clearly interrelated. One section is leading to the next, and they are following each other in sequence. the authors uses deductive reasoning in reaching to the conclusion. First, they issue a general overview of the issue of Ebola and continue writing about the experiment. The conclusion is then written in a clear as well as a specific manner. The hypothesis in this case is tested and a comparison of the research is made with the research conducted in the previous period. The data provided by the authors clearly offer support to the conclusion that has been drawn from various researchers. Apart from that, the authors offer plausible interpretation of the data, clearly testing the thesis statement. The authors assume that VSV-EBOV vaccine is important in the preventing against Ebola virus and the finding clearly concurs with the findings from other researchers. The data is clearly accounted for by the author and have not left any portion of the same. The evidence that the authors cite in this article offers support to the overall conclusion that VSV-EBOV can go a long way in preventing the spread of Ebola. Using experiment, the authors examines the applicability of VSV-EBOV and its efficacy in preventing the occurrence and severity of Ebola (5). Based on the comparison with other studies, the conclusion is well stipulated. Various arguments are cited by the study to ascertain the vaccine’s efficacy. The argument has a well-constructed logical flow, and this makes it interesting to the reader. Using the previous studies, the authors seek to prove that VSV-EBOV has the capacity to ensure the protection of the general population against the virus of Ebola. The utilization of real dose of vaccine is an important source of the primary data. VSV-EBOV virus was proved to ensure the protection against all the strains of Ebola, therefore, answering the thesis question. This is further proved by the fact that the control groups were observed to experience signs and symptoms of Ebola unlike the group injected with VSV-EBOV. The study is also credible in that it combines both the primary as well as the secondary data, making a comparison to prove that VSV-EBOV is essential in containing Ebola. A clear correlation is therefore, drawn between the use of VSV-EBOV and a reduction in Ebola cases. Works Cited 1. Banadyga, L, and A Marzi. "Closer Than Ever to an Ebola Virus Vaccine." Expert Review of Vaccines. 2017: 16(5): 401-402. 2. De, Clercq E. "Ebola Virus (ebov) Infection: Therapeutic Strategies." Biochemical Pharmacology. 2015; 93 (1): 1-10. 3. De, Clercq E. "Vesicular Stomatitis Virus (vsv) As a Paradigm for Predicting Antiviral Activity against Ebola Virus (ebov)." Marmara Pharmaceutcal Journal. 2015 2(19): 141. 4. Fraundorfer, Markus. "How to Confront the Threat of Ebola? Arguing for Reinforced Efforts to Promote Transnational Solidarity." Global Policy. 2016 7 (3): 340-350. 5. Geisbert TW et al. Vesicular Stomatitis Virus-Based Ebola Vaccine Is Well-Tolerated and Protects Immunocompromised Nonhuman Primates. Public Library of Science Internet resource, 2008. 6. Huttner, A, JA Dayer, S Yerly, C Combescure, F Auderset, J Desmeules, M Eickmann, A Finckh, AR Goncalves, JW Hooper, G Kaya, V Krähling, S Kwilas, B Lemaître, A Matthey, P Silvera, S Becker, PE Fast, V Moorthy, MP Kieny, L Kaiser, and CA Siegrist. "The Effect of Dose on the Safety and Immunogenicity of the Vsv Ebola Candidate Vaccine: a Randomised Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 1/2 Trial." The Lancet. Infectious Diseases. 2015; 15 (10): 1156-66. 7. Huttner, Angela, Julie-Anne Dayer, Sabine Yerly, Christophe Combescure, Floriane Auderset, Jules Desmeules, Markus Eickmann, Axel Finckh, Ana R. Goncalves, Jay W. Hooper, Gürkan Kaya, Verena Krähling, Steve Kwilas, Barbara Lemaître, Alain Matthey, Peter Silvera, Stephan Becker, Patricia E. Fast, Vasee Moorthy, Marie P. Kieny, Laurent Kaiser, and Claire-Anne Siegrist. "The Effect of Dose on the Safety and Immunogenicity of the Vsv Ebola Candidate Vaccine: a Randomised Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 1/2 Trial." The Lancet Infectious Diseases. 2015; 15(10): 1156-1166. 8. Krähling, Verena, Dirk Becker, Cornelius Rohde, Markus Eickmann, Yonca Eroğlu, Astrid Herwig, Romy Kerber, Katharina Kowalski, Júlia Vergara-Alert, Stephan Becker, Miša Korva, and Tatjana Avšič-Županc. "Development of an Antibody Capture Elisa Using Inactivated Ebola Zaire Makona Virus." Medical Microbiology and Immunology. 205 (2016 Sep; 205 (13): 173-183. 9. Liang, J, CA Sagum, MT Bedford, SS Sidhu, M Sudol, Z Han, and RN Harty. "Chaperone-mediated Autophagy Protein Bag3 Negatively Regulates Ebola and Marburg Vp40-Mediated Egress." Plos Pathogens. 2017; 13(1): 36-50. 10. Marzi, A, SJ Robertson, E Haddock, F Feldmann, PW Hanley, DP Scott, JE Strong, G Kobinger, SM Best, and H Feldmann. "Ebola Vaccine. Vsv-Ebov Rapidly Protects Macaques against Infection with the 2014/15 Ebola Virus Outbreak Strain." Science (new York, N.y.). 2015 March; 349(6249): 739-42. 11. Pécheur, EI, V Borisevich, P Halfmann, JD Morrey, DF Smee, M Prichard, CE Mire, Y Kawaoka, TW Geisbert, and SJ Polyak. "The Synthetic Antiviral Drug Arbidol Inhibits Globally Prevalent Pathogenic Viruses." Journal of Virology. 90.6 (2016): 3086-92. 12. Quinn et al. Rho Gtpases Modulate Entry of Ebola Virus and Vesicular Stomatitis Virus Pseudotyped Vectors▿. American Society for Microbiology (ASM, n.d.. Internet resource 13. Singh, Gurpreet, Arbind Kumar, Kashmir Singh, and Jagdeep Kaur. "Ebola Virus: an Introduction and Its Pathology." Reviews in Medical Virology. 2016 Jan; 130 (5): 49-56. 14. Viral Immunology. "Vsvδg/ebov Gp-Induced Innate Protection Enhances Natural Killer Cell Activity to Increase Survival in a Lethal Mouse Adapted Ebola Virus Infection." Viral Immunology. 28.1 (2015): 51-61. 15. Williams, Kinola J. N, Xiangguo Qiu, Lisa Fernando, Steven M. Jones, and Judie B. Alimonti. "Vsv??g/ebov Gp-Induced Innate Protection Enhances Natural Killer Cell Activity to Increase Survival in a Lethal Mouse Adapted Ebola Virus Infection." Viral Immunology. 28.1 2015 May; 100(7): 51-61. 16. World Health Organization (WHO), “Ebola situation report, 3 June 2015,” http://apps.who.int/ebola/ebola-situation-reports (2015). Read More