-
Journal of Clinical Medicine Feb 2024: There are concerns that eradication therapy may worsen kidney function in patients with decreased renal function. This study aimed to systematically review the... (Review)
Review
: There are concerns that eradication therapy may worsen kidney function in patients with decreased renal function. This study aimed to systematically review the literature regarding eradication in patients with renal impairment. : PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Igaku Chuo Zasshi were searched for comparative studies on eradication in patients with renal impairment. : Five articles were included in this systematic review. According to a randomized trial comparing a proton pump inhibitor (PPI) + clarithromycin + metronidazole and PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin in patients with decreased renal function, the incidence of acute renal failure was significantly lower in PPI + clarithromycin + metronidazole (2%: 1/44) than in PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin (18%: 8/44). The eradication rate in PPI + clarithromycin + metronidazole (92.5%) was significantly better than that in PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin (76.3%). According to four reports on eradication treatment using PPI + clarithromycin + amoxicillin in patients with and without decreased renal function, the eradication rates and adverse effects were similar in both groups. Regarding dose adjustment, three reports reduced the dose of antibiotics by half in patients with a creatinine clearance of 30 mL/min or less. : The regimen with PPIs, clarithromycin, and metronidazole is recommended for renal impairment. The combination of PPIs, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin, at reduced doses depending on the renal function, is also a potential option.
PubMed: 38337544
DOI: 10.3390/jcm13030850 -
Cureus Jan 2024Idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN) with moderate risk or above was recommended to receive immunosuppressive therapy. We attempted to evaluate the optimal dose of... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
Idiopathic membranous nephropathy (IMN) with moderate risk or above was recommended to receive immunosuppressive therapy. We attempted to evaluate the optimal dose of glucocorticoid when combined with evidence-proven effective immunosuppressants by network meta-analysis.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception until January 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in IMN limited to supportive care, glucocorticoids, cyclophosphamide, chlorambucil, calcineurin inhibitors (CNIs), and rituximab were screened.
RESULTS
Twenty-eight RCTs of 1,830 patients were included. Therapeutic regimens were divided as follows: moderate- to high-dose glucocorticoids plus CNIs (HMSCn), moderate- to high-dose glucocorticoids plus cyclophosphamide (HMSCt), moderate- to high-dose glucocorticoids plus chlorambucil (HMSCh), zero- to low-dose glucocorticoids plus CNIs (LNSCn), zero- to low-dose glucocorticoids plus cyclophosphamide (LNSCt), rituximab alone (R), glucocorticoids alone (SE), and supportive care alone (SP). Compared with SP, HMSCh (risk ratio [RR]: 1.77, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1, 3.18), HMSCn (RR: 2.5, 95%CI: 1.25, 5.11), HMSCt (RR: 2.15, 95%CI: 1.29, 3.64), LNSCn (RR: 2.16, 95%CI: 1.25, 3.95), and R (RR: 2.07, 95%CI: 1, 4.39) had a higher probability of total remission rate, while HMSCn represented the highest probability depending on the surface under the cumulative ranking area (SUCRA) ranking values. Regarding infection, no significant difference was found between different doses of glucocorticoids plus the same immunosuppressant. HMSCn and HMSCt showed superiority in reducing 24-hour urine total protein compared with HMSCh, LNSCn, SE, and SP, while HMSCn seemed to be the most effective regimen through the ranking of SUCRA value.
CONCLUSION
Moderate- to high-dose glucocorticoids showed superiority in proteinuria remission when combined with CNIs in IMN, with no increasing risk of infection.
PubMed: 38333440
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.51936 -
Journal of Arrhythmia Feb 2024Fluoroscopy is conventionally performed for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy and carries radiation drawback for both patients and medical workers....
BACKGROUND
Fluoroscopy is conventionally performed for cardiac implantable electronic device (CIED) therapy and carries radiation drawback for both patients and medical workers. Recently, zero to minimal fluoroscopy (ZMF) approach is introduced to reduce radiation exposure of fluoroscopy. This study compares the feasibility and safety of ZMF approach to fluoroscopy for CIEDs therapy in adults.
METHOD
A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Web of Science in March 2023. All observational or experimental studies comparing ZMF approach to fluoroscopy for adult CIEDs therapy were included. Reviews, case report/series, animal studies, and non-English articles were excluded. The success rate, procedural time, fluoroscopy time, radiation dose, and complications rate were compared for each approach.
RESULTS
Seven articles for permanent and three articles for temporary CIEDs were included for analysis. The success rate of ZMF for permanent CIEDs was similar to fluoroscopy method (OR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.33-4.15). The procedural time of ZMF was similar to fluoroscopy for both permanent and temporary CIEDs (standardized mean difference [SMD]: 0.10, 95% CI: -0.35 to 0.55 and SMD: -0.71, 95% CI: -1.87-0.44, respectively). However, ZMF approach markedly reduced the fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure for permanent CIEDs (SMD: -1.80, 95% CI: -2.49 to -1.12 and SMD: -1.26, 95% CI: -2.24 to -0.29). The complication rate was similar for permanent CIEDs (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.41-2.84), yet lowered for temporary CIEDs (OR: 0.34, 95% CI: 0.20-0.59).
CONCLUSION
ZMF had similar success rate, procedural time, and sum complication rate for permanent CIEDs implantation with a significant reduction of fluoroscopy time and radiation exposure.
PubMed: 38333407
DOI: 10.1002/joa3.12949 -
BMC Cancer Feb 2024To compare the efficacy, safety and effects on quality of life of different ALK-inhibitors for global and Asian patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Identifying optimal ALK inhibitors in first- and second-line treatment of patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the efficacy, safety and effects on quality of life of different ALK-inhibitors for global and Asian patients with advanced ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
METHODS
The included RCTs were identified through a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Clinical Trials.gov, and major cancer conferences. The assessment of progression-free survival (PFS), intracranial PFS, overall survival (OS), and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) was carried out using restricted mean survival time (RMST) model, fractional polynomial model and Royston-Parmar model. Time-invariant hazard ratio (HR) models were also used to validate and supplement the primary analysis. Objective response rate (ORR) and adverse events with any grade, grade 3-5 were assessed through a Bayesian network meta-analysis. The primary measures for OS, PFS, and PROs were HR and RMST. The odds ratio was the metric for evaluating safety, ORR, 12-month PFS rate, 24-month OS rate, and the 12-month non-deterioration rate of PROs. Subgroup analyses based on patient characteristics were performed.
RESULTS
A total of fourteen studies (ten for first-line, four for second-line) consisting of nine treatments (chemotherapy, crizotinib, alectinib [600mg BID], low-dose alectinib [300mg BID], brigatinib, ceritinib, ensartinib, envonalkib, and lorlatinib) were included. In the first-line setting, alectinib showed a significant advantage over crizotinib and had the longest OS among all ALK-inhibitors. Compared to crizotinib, lorlatinib had the best efficacy regarding PFS for global patients, followed closely by alectinib and brigatinib. For Asian patients, alectinib significantly improved PFS compared to other treatments. In second-line, alectinib had the highest PFS for patients pretreated with crizotinib, followed by brigatinib, ceritinib and chemotherapy. Alectinib, irrespective of the dose, was the safest first-line option, whereas lorlatinib, brigatinib, and ceritinib showed poorer safety profiles. Alectinib was also the safest ALK-inhibitor for crizotinib-resistant patients. Brigatinib had the best performance in terms of PROs.
CONCLUSIONS
Considering both efficacy and safety, alectinib appears to be the preferable treatment in first-line and second-line, particularly for Asian patients.
Topics: Humans; Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung; Crizotinib; Lung Neoplasms; Network Meta-Analysis; Bayes Theorem; Quality of Life; Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase; Protein Kinase Inhibitors; Carbazoles; Sulfones; Aminopyridines; Lactams; Pyrimidines; Pyrazoles; Organophosphorus Compounds
PubMed: 38331773
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-024-11916-4 -
BMJ Open Jan 2024The objective of the current study is to compare the treatment effects of different vitamins on essential hypertension to provide an initial basis for developing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The objective of the current study is to compare the treatment effects of different vitamins on essential hypertension to provide an initial basis for developing evidence-based practices.
DESIGN
Systematic review and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Five electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov) were searched from their inception to 25 September 2023.
OUTCOMES
The primary outcomes were the difference between the intervention group and the control group in changes in office systolic blood pressure (SBP) and office diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from baseline. The secondary outcomes were the difference between the intervention group and the control group in changes in 24-hour mean ambulatory systolic blood pressure (24 hours SBP), 24-hour mean ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (24 hours DBP) and heart rate (HR) from baseline.
RESULTS
A total of 23 studies comparing five vitamins (vitamin B, vitamin C, vitamin D, vitamin E, folic acid) and involving 2218 participants were included. The included trials were all vitamin versus placebo, so the network was star-shaped. Among the five vitamins, only vitamin E was significantly more effective at reducing SBP (mean difference: -14.14 mm Hg, 95% credible intervals: -27.62 to -0.88) than placebo. In addition, no evidence was found that any of the five vitamins influenced DBP, 24 hours SBP, 24 hours DBP, or HR. The dose of vitamins, geographical region and percentage of males (only SBP) might be sources of heterogeneity. Sensitivity and subgroup analysis revealed that the effect of vitamin intervention on blood pressure varies according to different doses of vitamins.
CONCLUSIONS
According to the results, vitamin E might be an effective measure to reduce SBP, but more research is needed to validate this finding.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42022352332.
Topics: Adult; Male; Humans; Vitamin D; Ascorbic Acid; Hypertension; Folic Acid; Riboflavin; Vitamin E; Network Meta-Analysis; Vitamins; Essential Hypertension; Blood Pressure; Vitamin A; Vitamin K
PubMed: 38296289
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074511 -
The Lancet. Global Health Mar 2024Long-term immunity following yellow fever vaccination remains controversial. We aimed to summarise the literature regarding the long-term protection (≥10 years)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Long-term immunity following yellow fever vaccination remains controversial. We aimed to summarise the literature regarding the long-term protection (≥10 years) conveyed by a single dose of yellow fever vaccination.
METHODS
In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched 11 databases from database inception to Aug 24, 2023. We included cohort and cross-sectional studies reporting immunogenicity outcomes for children or adults who received a single dose of yellow fever vaccination 10 or more years ago. Case series and single case reports were excluded. Participants who received more than one dose of yellow fever vaccination before measurement of the outcome were excluded. Identified records were reviewed by two independent reviewers. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis was the pooled seroprotection rate. Risk of bias was assessed with the Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool, and the Joanna Briggs Institute tool for analytical cross-sectional studies. Studies of moderate or good quality that reported seroprotection were included for random-effects meta-analysis and stratified by endemicity and specific risk groups. The study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023384087.
FINDINGS
Of the 7363 articles identified by our search, 39 were eligible for inclusion for systematic review. These studies comprised 2895 individuals vaccinated 10-60 years ago. 20 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Pooled seroprotection rates were 94% (95% CI 86-99) among healthy adults in a non-endemic setting (mostly travellers) and 76% (65-85) in an endemic setting (all Brazilian studies). The pooled seroprotection rate was 47% (35-60) in children (aged 9-23 months at time of vaccination) and 61% (38-82) in people living with HIV. Reported criteria for seroprotection were highly heterogeneous.
INTERPRETATION
The gathered evidence suggests that a single dose of yellow fever vaccination provides lifelong protection in travellers. However, in people living with HIV and children (younger than 2 years), booster doses might still be required because lower proportions of vaccinees were seroprotected 10 or more years post-vaccination. Lower observed seroprotection rates among residents of endemic areas were partly explained by the use of a higher cutoff for seroprotection that was applied in Brazil. Studies from sub-Saharan Africa were scarce and of low quality; thus no conclusions could be drawn for this region.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Child; Adult; Humans; Yellow Fever; Cross-Sectional Studies; Vaccination; Time Factors; HIV Infections
PubMed: 38272044
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00556-9 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jan 2024Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Balancing the risk of bleeding and thrombosis after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) is challenging, and the optimal antithrombotic therapy remains uncertain. The potential of non-vitamin K antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) to prevent ischaemic cardiovascular events is promising, but the evidence remains limited.
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of non-vitamin-K-antagonist oral anticoagulants (NOACs) in addition to background antiplatelet therapy, compared with placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, after acute myocardial infarction (AMI) in people without an indication for anticoagulation (i.e. atrial fibrillation or venous thromboembolism).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, the Conference Proceedings Citation Index - Science, and two clinical trial registers in September 2022 with no language restrictions. We checked the reference lists of included studies for any additional trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated NOACs plus antiplatelet therapy versus placebo, antiplatelet therapy, or both, in people without an indication for anticoagulation after an AMI.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently checked the results of searches to identify relevant studies, assessed each included study, and extracted study data. We conducted random-effects pairwise analyses using Review Manager Web, and network meta-analysis using the R package 'netmeta'. We ranked competing treatments by P scores, which are derived from the P values of all pairwise comparisons and allow ranking of treatments on a continuous 0-to-1 scale.
MAIN RESULTS
We identified seven eligible RCTs, including an ongoing trial that we could not include in the analysis. Of the six RCTs involving 33,039 participants, three RCTs compared rivaroxaban with placebo, two RCTs compared apixaban with placebo, and one RCT compared dabigatran with placebo. All participants in the six RCTs received concomitant antiplatelet therapy. The available evidence suggests that rivaroxaban compared with placebo reduces the rate of all-cause mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.69 to 0.98; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty) and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.01; NNTB 250; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; moderate certainty). There is probably little or no difference between apixaban and placebo in all-cause mortality (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.35; number needed to treat for an additional harmful outcome (NNTH) 334; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty) and cardiovascular mortality (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.27; number needed to treat not applicable; 2 studies, 8638 participants; moderate certainty). Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality compared with placebo (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.06; NNTB 63; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Dabigatran compared with placebo may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality, although the point estimate suggests benefit (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.52; NNTB 143; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). Two of the investigated NOACs were associated with an increased risk of major bleeding compared to placebo: apixaban (RR 2.41, 95% CI 1.44 to 4.06; NNTH 143; 2 studies, 8544 participants; high certainty) and rivaroxaban (RR 3.31, 95% CI 1.12 to 9.77; NNTH 125; 3 studies, 21,870 participants; high certainty). There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding (RR 1.74, 95% CI 0.22 to 14.12; NNTH 500; 1 study, 1861 participants; low certainty). The results of the network meta-analysis were inconclusive between the different NOACs at all individual doses for all primary outcomes. However, low-certainty evidence suggests that apixaban (combined dose) may be less effective than rivaroxaban and dabigatran for preventing all-cause mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with placebo, rivaroxaban reduces all-cause mortality and probably reduces cardiovascular mortality after AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Dabigatran may reduce the rate of all-cause mortality and may have little or no effect on cardiovascular mortality. There is probably no meaningful difference in the rate of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality between apixaban and placebo. Moreover, we found no meaningful benefit in efficacy outcomes for specific therapy doses of any investigated NOACs following AMI in people without an indication for anticoagulation. Evidence from the included studies suggests that rivaroxaban and apixaban increase the risk of major bleeding compared with placebo. There may be little or no difference between dabigatran and placebo in the risk of major bleeding. Network meta-analysis did not show any superiority of one NOAC over another for our prespecified primary outcomes. Although the evidence suggests that NOACs reduce mortality, the effect size or impact is small; moreover, NOACs may increase major bleeding. Head-to-head trials, comparing NOACs against each other, are required to provide more solid evidence.
Topics: Humans; Dabigatran; Rivaroxaban; Network Meta-Analysis; Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors; Anticoagulants; Myocardial Infarction; Hemorrhage
PubMed: 38264795
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014678.pub2 -
Frontiers in Pharmacology 2023Accumulating evidence are available on the efficacy of high-dose isoniazid (INH) for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) treatment. We aimed to perform a...
Accumulating evidence are available on the efficacy of high-dose isoniazid (INH) for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) treatment. We aimed to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to compare clinical efficacy and safety outcomes of high-dose INH- containing therapy against other regimes. We searched the following databases PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We considered and included any studies comparing treatment success, treatment unsuccess, or adverse events in patients with MDR-TB treated with high-dose INH (>300 mg/day or >5 mg/kg/day). Of a total of 3,749 citations screened, 19 studies were included, accounting for 5,103 subjects, the risk of bias was low in all studies. The pooled treatment success, death, and adverse events of high-dose INH-containing therapy was 76.5% (95% CI: 70.9%-81.8%; I: 92.03%), 7.1% (95% CI: 5.3%-9.1%; I: 73.75%), and 61.1% (95% CI: 43.0%-77.8%; I: 98.23%), respectively. The high-dose INH administration is associated with significantly higher treatment success (RR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.04-1.22; < 0.01) and a lower risk of death (RR: 0.45, 95% CI: 0.32-0.63; < 0.01). However, in terms of other outcomes (such as adverse events, and culture conversion rate), no difference was observed between high-dose INH and other treatment options (all > 0.05). In addition, no publication bias was observed. In MDR-TB patients, high-dose INH administration is associated with a favorable outcome and acceptable adverse-event profile. identifier CRD42023438080.
PubMed: 38259285
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1331371 -
Nutrients Jan 2024Pre-exercise intake of caffeine (from ~3 to 9 mg/kg) has been demonstrated as an effective supplementation strategy to increase fat oxidation during fasted exercise.... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Pre-exercise intake of caffeine (from ~3 to 9 mg/kg) has been demonstrated as an effective supplementation strategy to increase fat oxidation during fasted exercise. However, a pre-exercise meal can alter the potential effect of caffeine on fat oxidation during exercise as caffeine modifies postprandial glycaemic and insulinemic responses. Hypothetically, the effect of caffeine on fat oxidation may be reduced or even withdrawn during fed-state exercise. The present systematic review aimed to meta-analyse investigations on the effect of acute caffeine intake on the rate of fat oxidation during submaximal aerobic exercise performed in the fed state (last meal < 5 h before exercise). A total of 18 crossover trials with randomised and placebo-controlled protocols and published between 1982 and 2021 were included, with a total of 228 participants (185 males and 43 females). Data were extracted to compare rates of fat oxidation during exercise with placebo and caffeine at the same exercise intensity, which reported 20 placebo-caffeine pairwise comparisons. A meta-analysis of the studies was performed, using the standardised mean difference (SMD) estimated from Hedges' , with 95% confidence intervals (CI). In comparison with the placebo, caffeine increased the rate of fat oxidation during fed-state exercise (number of comparisons (n) = 20; = 0.020, SMD = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.20 to 1.20). Only studies with a dose < 6 mg/kg of caffeine (n = 13) increased the rate of fat oxidation during fed-state exercise ( = 0.004, SMD = 0.86, 95% CI = 0.27 to 1.45), while no such effect was observed in studies with doses ≥6 mg/kg (n = 7; = 0.97, SMD = -0.03, 95% CI = -1.40 to 1.35). The effect of caffeine on fat oxidation during fed-state exercise was observed in active untrained individuals (n = 13; < 0.001, SMD = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.39 to 1.30) but not in aerobically trained participants (n = 7; = 0.27, SMD = 0.50, 95% CI = -0.39 to 1.39). Likewise, the effect of caffeine on fat oxidation was observed in caffeine-naïve participants (n = 9; < 0.001, SMD = 0.82, 95% CI = 0.45 to 1.19) but not in caffeine consumers (n = 3; = 0.54, SMD = 0.57, 95% CI = -1.23 to 2.37). In conclusion, acute caffeine intake in combination with a meal ingested within 5 h before the onset of exercise increased the rate of fat oxidation during submaximal aerobic exercise. The magnitude of the effect of caffeine on fat oxidation during fed-state exercise may be modulated by the dose of caffeine administered (higher with <6 mg/kg than with ≥6 mg/kg), participants' aerobic fitness level (higher in active than in aerobically trained individuals), and habituation to caffeine (higher in caffeine-naïve than in caffeine consumers).
Topics: Female; Male; Humans; Caffeine; Exercise; Fasting; Meals; Oxidation-Reduction
PubMed: 38257100
DOI: 10.3390/nu16020207 -
Journal of Neurology Mar 2024Case-reports/series and cohorts of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) associated with COVID-19 vaccination have been reported. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Case-reports/series and cohorts of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) associated with COVID-19 vaccination have been reported.
METHODS
A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies of GBS after COVID-19 vaccination was carried out. Incidence and incidence rate ratio for a number of vaccine doses and risk of GBS, also considering the specific vaccine technology, were calculated in a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Of 554 citations retrieved, 518 were discarded as irrelevant. We finally included 15 studies. The random effect model yielded, regardless of the vaccine technology, 1.25 (95%CI 0.21; 2.83) GBS cases per million of COVID-19 vaccine doses, 3.93 (2.54; 5.54) cases per million doses for adenovirus-vectored vaccines and 0.69 (0.38; 1.06) cases per million doses for mRNA vaccines. The GBS risk was 2.6 times increased with the first dose. Regardless of the vaccine technology, the GBS risk was not increased but disaggregating the data it was 2.37 (1.67; 3.36) times increased for adenovirus-vectored vaccines and 0.32 (0.23; 0.47) for mRNA vaccines. Mortality for GBS after vaccination was 0.10 per million doses and 4.6 per GBS cases.
CONCLUSIONS
Adenovirus-vectored vaccines showed a 2.4 times increased risk of GBS that was about seven times higher compared with mRNA-based vaccines. The decreased GBS risk associated with mRNA vaccines was possibly due to an elicited reduction of infections, including SARS-CoV-2, associated with GBS during the vaccination period. How adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines may trigger GBS is unclear and further studies should investigate the relationship between vaccine technologies and GBS risk.
Topics: Humans; COVID-19; COVID-19 Vaccines; Guillain-Barre Syndrome; mRNA Vaccines; Vaccination
PubMed: 38233678
DOI: 10.1007/s00415-024-12186-7