The Thematic Network; European Malaria Vaccine Research and Development Network, named European Malaria Vaccine Initiative (EMVI) network meeting on 8 March 1999 at Hotel Leopold, Brussels

List of Participants:

David Arnot
Klavs Berzins
Bjarne Bjorvatn
Shyama Chatterjee
Virander S. Chauhan
Giampietro Corradin
Umberto D’Alessandro
Pierre Druilhe
Philippe Dubois
Wijnand Eling
Fulvio Esposito
Socrates Herrera
Anthony Holder
Michael Hollingdale
Graham Mitchell
Robert Sauerwein
Thor Theander
Michael Theisen

Commission’s Officials:

Joachim Hombach, DGXII, Life Sciences, Key Action 2
Michel Pletschette, DGXII, Life Sciences, Key Action 2
Anna Karaoglou, DGXII, INCO-DEV
Jaak Sinnaeve, DGXII, INCO-DEV
Mamadou Traoré, DGXII, INCO-DEV

Minutes of Meeting

Bjarne Bjorvatn, holder of the EMVI contract opened the meeting by welcoming all participants with special thanks to the officials of the European Commission DGXII for taking time off to brief the network members on the advanced calls for vaccine proposals under the Fifth Framework Programme’s Life Sciences Key Action 2, and INCO-DEV/Health Programmes.

Søren Jepsen, manager of EMVI’s secretariat gave a presentation of EMVI’s background, the events and discussions within the concerted action VINCOMAL and AMVTN that led to the proposal of EMVI in 1997. The network was further briefed on the discussions that took place at the inaugural meeting in Bergen, and the subsequent structural amendments, in particular the establishment of the Board and the appointment of the independent Scientific Advisory Committee (SAC). The participants were also informed that of the financial target of just over EURO 2 million, 1.2 million had already been pledged by Member States, and that with the interest expressed by additional EU members, it is anticipated that the budgetary requirements of EURO 2 million plus could be achieved within the next six months.

EMVI launched its first call for Letters of Interest (LoI) in Autumn 1998 with deadline 5 November 1998. The network members were informed that EMVI called for LoI with the aim of having some of them developed to full proposals. Sixteen LoIs were received, one after the deadline. Each participating Member State and the Commission is entitled to nominate scientists to the SAC as pointed out in paragraph 4 of the project document, which is available on EMVI’s Home Page www.emvi.org. Letters of Interest are currently being assessed by the SAC, and a decision is anticipated no later than the second half of April. 

Using overheads the participants were briefed on the process and procedures guiding EMVI, and how EMVI interacts with the European Commission’s two research programmes dealing with malaria vaccines.

EMVI’s secretariat has had consultations with both Life Sciences Key Action 2 Programme and the INCO-DEV Programme to ensure synchrony and complementarity, and to avoid duplication. These consultations have strongly confirmed the envisaged role and mandate of EMVI.

The network members were briefed on EMVI’s interaction with USAID malaria vaccine programme and the initial consultations with the NIH malaria vaccine activities.

Finally the participants were informed that EMVI’s secretariat was acting as administrator for AMVTN, which has recently (1 January 1999) been granted a new contract with the INCO-DEV Programme. As a consequence of the importance of the ties between AMVTN and EMVI, the latter’s Board has decided that AMVTN should be represented on its Board with a full member.

The subsequent discussion was very brief touching upon the role and mandate of EMVI in the context of the aforementioned two Commission malaria vaccine research programmes. On the question of who would constitute the members of the EMVI network, it was emphasised that it was an open network accessible to any scientist or research group seriously involved in any aspect of malaria vaccine research and development, and that the participants at the network were the "owners" of the network initiative, whereas contributing EU Member States and the Commission constitute the Board which is the sole body which can release funds upon the recommendation of the SAC.

After the coffee break Marc De Bruycker, who has been in the INCO Programme and its predecessor the STD programme since its inception 15 years ago, informed the meeting that as pr. 1 March he had been assigned new duties in DGVIII (development) with the specific task of liaising between DGXII and DGVIII to establish a grip function (getting research into policies). He introduced Paul Hagan’s successor, Mamadou Traore, who will be in charge of parasitology in the INCO-DEV/Health Programmes. Marc De Bruycker then introduced his successor Anna Karaoglou, who joins the INCO-DEV Programme in April. Finally the Head of the entire INCO-DEV Programme Jaak Sinnaeve was introduced.

Mamadou Traore gave an overview of the STD and INCO-DC Programmes investment in parasitology research, and more specifically in malaria and malaria vaccine research, and outlined the advanced first call for proposals, which will be announced later in March with a deadline June 1999. In the health area the programme will concentrate on vaccine proposals, as was the case at the opening of the Fourth Framework Programme.

At the following question and answer session Jaak Sinnaeve, Head of the INCO-DEV Programme, confirmed that the indicative budget for health research under the new INCO-DEV Programme was approx. the same as for the previous INCO-DC Programme. He stressed that effort would be made to focus on areas of major achievements during the previous programmes, and that links had already been established with Key Action 2 of the Life Sciences Programme, in order to harmonise and ensure complementarity of the Commission’s two programmes concerned with malaria vaccine research and development. The participants were informed of meetings to this effect at unit head level. Jaak Sinnaeve underlined that the success of the INCO-DEV Programme was dependent on active participation of the best scientists in Europe and developing countries, and these scientists’ constructive input to the INCO-DEV management team.

After lunch Michel Pletschette gave an overview of the Life Sciences Key Action 2 Programme, Control of Infectious Diseases with special emphasis on the vaccine research and development component. He stressed the important change that had taken place from Framework Four to Framework Five, in particular the changes from technology driven to need driven research, and the request for tangible results of research efforts. The participants were further informed that whereas projects could still be submitted for evaluation, the Commission favoured submission of clustered projects or a number of projects comprising the critical mass needed to achieve the goals set forth in the Commission’s Work Programme. As part of this process emphasis will also be placed on a clusters management structure and predicted management capability and capacity. The following discussion touched on the definition of a cluster, the formation of clusters, the manageable size of a cluster, the maturity of the interaction between various partners in a cluster and the foreseeable volume of financing.

The Manager of EMVI’s secretariat thanked the participants, especially the Commission’s officials for an extensive and helpful briefing just in time for preparation of proposals, and as there were no further questions, closed the meeting requesting the participants to start organising critical masses/clusters in preparation for project proposals for the two research programmes.