Gonorrhoea, the sexually transmissible infection caused by Neisseria gonorrhoeae, has a substantial impact on sexual and reproductive health globally with an estimated 82 million new infections each year worldwide. N. gonorrhoeae antimicrobial resistance continues to escalate, and disease control is largely reliant on effective therapy as there is no proven effective gonococcal vaccine available. However, there is increasing evidence from observational cohort studies that the serogroup B meningococcal vaccine four-component meningitis B vaccine (4CMenB) (Bexsero), licensed to prevent invasive disease caused by Neisseria meningitidis, may provide cross-protection against the closely related bacterium N. gonorrhoeae. This study will evaluate the efficacy of 4CMenB against N. gonorrhoeae infection in men (cis and trans), transwomen and non-binary people who have sex with men (hereafter referred to as GBM+).

This is a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial in GBM+, either HIV-negative on pre-exposure prophylaxis against HIV or living with HIV (CD4 count >350 cells/mm³), who have had a diagnosis of gonorrhoea or infectious syphilis in the last 18 months (a key characteristic associated with a high risk of N. gonorrhoeae infection). Participants are randomised 1:1 to receive two doses of 4CMenB or placebo 3 months apart. Participants have 3-monthly visits over 24 months, which include testing for N. gonorrhoeae and other sexually transmissible infections, collection of demographics, sexual behaviour risks and antibiotic use, and collection of research samples for analysis of N. gonorrhoeae-specific systemic and mucosal immune responses. The primary outcome is the incidence of the first episode of N. gonorrhoeae infection, as determined by nucleic acid amplification tests, post month 4. Additional outcomes consider the incidence of symptomatic or asymptomatic N. gonorrhoeae infection at different anatomical sites (ie, urogenital, anorectum or oropharynx), incidence by N. gonorrhoeae genotype and antimicrobial resistance phenotype, and level and functional activity of N. gonorrhoeae-specific antibodies.

Ethical approval was obtained from the St Vincent’s Hospital Human Research Ethics Committee, St Vincent’s Hospital Sydney, NSW, Australia (ref: 2020/ETH01084). Results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and via presentation at national and international conferences.

NCT04415424.

International trials can be challenging to operationalise due to incompatibilities between country-specific policies and infrastructures. The aim of this systematic review was to identify the operational complexities of conducting international trials and identify potential solutions for overcoming them.

Systematic review.

Medline, Embase and Health Management Information Consortium were searched from 2006 to 30 January 2023.

All studies reporting operational challenges (eg, site selection, trial management, intervention management, data management) of conducting international trials were included.

Search results were independently screened by at least two reviewers and data were extracted into a proforma.

38 studies (35 RCTs, 2 reports and 1 qualitative study) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median sample size was 1202 (IQR 332–4056) and median number of sites was 40 (IQR 13–78). 88.6% of studies had an academic sponsor and 80% were funded through government sources. Operational complexities were particularly reported during trial set-up due to lack of harmonisation in regulatory approvals and in relation to sponsorship structure, with associated budgetary impacts. Additional challenges included site selection, staff training, lengthy contract negotiations, site monitoring, communication, trial oversight, recruitment, data management, drug procurement and distribution, pharmacy involvement and biospecimen processing and transport.

International collaborative trials are valuable in cases where recruitment may be difficult, diversifying participation and applicability. However, multiple operational and regulatory challenges are encountered when implementing a trial in multiple countries. Careful planning and communication between trials units and investigators, with an emphasis on establishing adequately resourced cross-border sponsorship structures and regulatory approvals, may help to overcome these barriers and realise the benefits of the approach.

osf-registrations-yvtjb-v1.

South Africa has a high prevalence of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM; 15%) and many of these women (48%) progress to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) within 5 years post partum. A significant proportion (47%) of the women are not aware of their diabetes status after the index pregnancy, which may be in part to low postnatal diabetes screening rates. Therefore, we aim to evaluate a intervention that reduces the subsequent risk of developing T2DM among women with recent GDM. Our objectives are fourfold: (1) compare the completion of the nationally recommended 6-week postpartum oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) between intervention and control groups; (2) compare the diabetes risk reduction between control and intervention groups at 12 months’ post partum; (3) assess the process of implementation; and (4) assess the cost-effectiveness of the proposed intervention package.

Convergent parallel mixed-methods study with the main component being a pragmatic, 2-arm individually randomised controlled trial, which will be carried out at five major referral centres and up to 26 well-baby clinics in the Western Cape and Gauteng provinces of South Africa. Participants (n=370) with GDM (with no prior history of either type 1 or type 2 diabetes) will be recruited into the study at 24–36 weeks’ gestational age, at which stage first data collection will take place. Subsequent data collection will take place at 6–8 weeks after delivery and again at 12 months. The primary outcome for the trial is twofold: first, the completion of the recommended 2-hour OGTT at the well-baby clinics 6–8 weeks post partum, and second, a composite diabetes risk reduction indicator at 12 months. Process evaluation will assess fidelity, acceptability, and dose of the intervention.

Ethics approval has been granted from University of Cape Town (829/2016), University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg (M170228), University of Stellenbosch (N17/04/032) and the University of Montreal (2019-794). The results of the trial will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentations to key South African Government stakeholders and health service providers.

1 December 2022 (version #2). Any protocol amendments will be communicated to investigators, Human Ethics Research Committees, trial participants, and trial registries.

PAN African Clinical Trials Registry (https://pactr.samrc.ac.za) on 11 June 2018 (identifier PACTR201805003336174).

During the last two decades, researchers and funders increasingly recognised the value of engaging patients and communities in research. Despite progress, community engagement remains challenging. There are few examples of successful participant engagement in governance of large-scale research programmes. Here we describe efforts to engage participants as partners in new governance roles in the All of Us Research Program, a precision medicine research initiative which intends to enrol at least one million participants. Using intentional, participant-centric engagement strategies, the All of Us Engagement Core recruited and integrated a diverse group of participants into governance roles including Steering and Executive Committees. Evaluation measures included a survey to assess Consortium Members’ readiness for participant engagement.

Over a 3-year period, all items on the survey increased (higher readiness). Of the 291 respondents to the 2021 survey, respondents most frequently agreed that participant perspectives are essential (100%), participants understand enough to contribute meaningfully (94%) and participants should be involved in setting goals (96%). Respondents least frequently agreed that participants should have an equal voice in Working Groups (75%), Steering Committee (69%) and Executive Committee (63%).

In conclusion, participants can be effectively integrated into large-scale research governance, which is associated with increased researcher readiness for engagement.