-
Human Vaccines & Immunotherapeutics Oct 2021A systematic review was conducted in Mexico to consolidate and evaluate evidence after 15 years of rotavirus vaccination, according to the National Immunization...
A systematic review was conducted in Mexico to consolidate and evaluate evidence after 15 years of rotavirus vaccination, according to the National Immunization Program. Five databases were screened to identify published articles (January 2000-February 2020) with evidence on all clinical and epidemiological endpoints (e.g. immunogenicity, safety, efficacy, impact/effectiveness) of rotavirus vaccination in Mexico. Twenty-two articles were identified (observational studies including health-economic models: 17; randomized controlled trials: 5). Fourteen studies evaluated a human attenuated vaccine (HRV), four studies evaluated both vaccines, and only two evaluated a bovine-human reassortant vaccine, with local efficacy data only for HRV. Local evidence shows vaccines are safe, immunogenic, efficacious, and provide an acceptable risk-benefit profile. The benefits of both vaccines in alleviating the burden of all-cause diarrhea mortality and morbidity are documented in several local post-licensure studies. Findings signify overall benefits of rotavirus vaccination and support the continued use of rotavirus vaccine in Mexico.
Topics: Animals; Cattle; Humans; Infant; Mexico; Rotavirus; Rotavirus Infections; Rotavirus Vaccines; Vaccination; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 34187326
DOI: 10.1080/21645515.2021.1936859 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Oct 2018To compare the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of the herpes zoster live attenuated vaccine with the herpes zoster adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine or placebo... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
To compare the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of the herpes zoster live attenuated vaccine with the herpes zoster adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine or placebo for adults aged 50 and older.
DESIGN
Systematic review with bayesian meta-analysis and network meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library (inception to January 2017), grey literature, and reference lists of included studies.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR STUDY SELECTION
Experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational studies that compared the live attenuated vaccine with the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine, placebo, or no vaccine in adults aged 50 and older. Relevant outcomes were incidence of herpes zoster (primary outcome), herpes zoster ophthalmicus, post-herpetic neuralgia, quality of life, adverse events, and death.
RESULTS
27 studies (22 randomised controlled trials) including 2 044 504 patients, along with 18 companion reports, were included after screening 2037 titles and abstracts, followed by 175 full text articles. Network meta-analysis of five randomised controlled trials found no statistically significant differences between the live attenuated vaccine and placebo for incidence of laboratory confirmed herpes zoster. The adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine, however, was statistically superior to both the live attenuated vaccine (vaccine efficacy 85%, 95% credible interval 31% to 98%) and placebo (94%, 79% to 98%). Network meta-analysis of 11 randomised controlled trials showed the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine to be associated with statistically more adverse events at injection sites than the live attenuated vaccine (relative risk 1.79, 95% credible interval 1.05 to 2.34; risk difference 30%, 95% credible interval 2% to 51%) and placebo (5.63, 3.57 to 7.29 and 53%, 30% to 73%, respectively). Network meta-analysis of nine randomised controlled trials showed the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine to be associated with statistically more systemic adverse events than placebo (2.28, 1.45 to 3.65 and 20%, 6% to 40%, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Using the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine might prevent more cases of herpes zoster than using the live attenuated vaccine, but the adjuvant recombinant subunit vaccine also carries a greater risk of adverse events at injection sites.
PROTOCOL REGISTRATION
Prospero CRD42017056389.
Topics: Adjuvants, Immunologic; Aged; Female; Health Services for the Aged; Herpes Zoster; Herpes Zoster Vaccine; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 30361202
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k4029 -
Journal of Hematology & Oncology Feb 2022Patients with cancer have an increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and an attenuated responses to various vaccines. This meta-analysis aims to assess the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Patients with cancer have an increased risk of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and an attenuated responses to various vaccines. This meta-analysis aims to assess the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccination in patients with cancer.
METHODS
Electronic databases were systematically searched on August 1, 2021 for studies that reported the serologic response to COVID-19 vaccine in cancer patients. Random effects models were used to achieve pooled serologic response rates and odds ratios (ORs).
RESULTS
We analyzed 16 observational studies with a total of 1453 patients with cancer. A majority of studies used mRNA vaccines (BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273). The proportion of patients achieving a serologic response after a single and two doses of COVID-19 vaccine were 54.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] 41.0-66.9) and 87.7% (95% CI 82.5-91.5), respectively. Patients with hematologic cancers had a lower response rate after the second dose of vaccine compared to those with solid organ cancers (63.7% vs. 94.9%), which was attributable to the low response rates associated with certain conditions (chronic lymphocytic leukemia, lymphoma) and therapies (anti-CD20, kinase inhibitors). A lower proportion of patients with cancer achieved a serologic response compared to control patients after one and two doses of vaccine (OR0.073 [95% CI 0.026-0.20] and 0.10 [95% CI 0.039-0.26], respectively).
CONCLUSIONS
Patients with cancer, especially those with hematologic B-cell malignancies, have a lower serologic response to COVID-19 vaccines. The results suggest that cancer patients should continue to follow safety measures including mask-wearing after vaccination and suggest the need for additional strategies for prophylaxis.
Topics: COVID-19; COVID-19 Serological Testing; COVID-19 Vaccines; Humans; Neoplasms; Prognosis; SARS-CoV-2; Survival Rate
PubMed: 35123511
DOI: 10.1186/s13045-022-01233-3 -
Expert Review of Vaccines May 2019Preterm infants (PIs) are at increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). However, delayed vaccination start and low vaccine coverage are still reported. Areas...
Update on vaccination of preterm infants: a systematic review about safety and efficacy/effectiveness. Proposal for a position statement by Italian Society of Pediatric Allergology and Immunology jointly with the Italian Society of Neonatology.
Preterm infants (PIs) are at increased risk of vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs). However, delayed vaccination start and low vaccine coverage are still reported. Areas covered: This systematic review includes 37 articles on preterm vaccination published in 2008-2018 in PubMed. Both live attenuated and inactivated vaccines are safe and well tolerated in PIs. Local reactions, apnea, and reactivity changes are the most frequently reported adverse events. Lower gestational age and birth weight, preimmunization apnea, longer use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) are risk factors for apnea. The proportion of PIs who develop protective humoral and cellular immunity is generally similar to full terms although later gestational age is associated with increased antibody IgG concentrations (i.e. against certain pneumococcal serotypes, influenza, hepatitis B virus and poliovirus 1) and increased mononuclear cells proliferation (i.e. after inactivated poliovirus). Expert opinion: PIs can be safely and adequately protected by available vaccines with the same schedule used for full terms. Data at this regard have been retrieved by studies using a 3-dose primary series for pneumococcal and hexavalent vaccines. Further studies are needed regarding the 2 + 1 schedule. Apnea represents a nonspecific stress response in PIs, thus those hospitalized at 2 months should have cardio-respiratory monitoring after their first vaccination.
Topics: Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Humans; Immunity, Cellular; Immunity, Humoral; Immunization Schedule; Infant, Premature; Italy; Vaccines; Vaccines, Attenuated; Vaccines, Inactivated
PubMed: 30952198
DOI: 10.1080/14760584.2019.1604230 -
The Lancet. Global Health Apr 2024Typhoid is a serious public health threat in many low-income and middle-income countries. Several vaccines for typhoid have been recommended by WHO for typhoid... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Typhoid is a serious public health threat in many low-income and middle-income countries. Several vaccines for typhoid have been recommended by WHO for typhoid prevention in endemic countries. This study aimed to review the efficacy of typhoid vaccines against culture-confirmed Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi.
METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and Embase for studies published in English between Jan 1, 1986 and Nov 2, 2023. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing typhoid vaccines with a placebo or another vaccine. This meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of several typhoid vaccines, including live attenuated oral Ty21a vaccine, Vi capsular polysaccharide (Vi-PS), Vi polysaccharide conjugated to recombinant Pseudomonas aeruginosa exotoxin A vaccine (Vi-rEPA), and Vi-tetanus toxoid conjugate vaccine (TCV). The certainty of evidence for key outcomes was evaluated using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations methodology. The outcome of interest was typhoid fever confirmed by the isolation of Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi in blood and adverse events following immunisation. This study is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42021241043).
FINDINGS
We included 14 RCTs assessing four different vaccines (Ty21a: four trials; Vi-PS: five trials; Vi-rEPA: one trial; TCV: four trials) involving 585 253 participants. All trials were conducted in typhoid endemic countries and the age of participants ranged from 6 months to 50 years. The pooled efficacy against typhoid fever was 45% (95% CI 33-55%; four trials; 247 649 participants; I 59%; moderate certainty) for Ty21a and 58% (44-69%; five trials; 214 456 participants; I 34%; moderate certainty) for polysaccharide Vi-PS. The cumulative efficacy of two doses of Vi-rEPA vaccine at 2 years was 91% (88-96%; one trial; 12 008 participants; moderate certainty). The pooled efficacy of a single shot of TCV at 2 years post-immunisation was 83% (77-87%; four trials; 111 130 participants; I 0%; moderate certainty). All vaccines were safe, with no serious adverse effects reported in the trials.
INTERPRETATION
The existing data from included trials provide promising results regarding the efficacy and safety of the four recommended typhoid vaccines. TCV and Vi-rEPA were found to have the highest efficacy at 2 years post-immunisation. However, follow-up data for Vi-rEPA are scarce and only TCV is pre-qualified by WHO. Therefore, roll-out of TCV into routine immunisation programmes in typhoid endemic settings is highly recommended.
FUNDING
There was no funding source for this study.
Topics: Humans; Infant; Salmonella typhi; Typhoid Fever; Typhoid-Paratyphoid Vaccines; Pseudomonas aeruginosa Exotoxin A; Vaccines, Attenuated; Vaccines, Conjugate; Tetanus Toxoid; Polysaccharides
PubMed: 38485426
DOI: 10.1016/S2214-109X(23)00606-X -
PloS One 2024Colibacillosis, a disease caused by Escherichia coli in broiler chickens has serious implications on food safety, security, and economic sustainability. Antibiotics are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Colibacillosis, a disease caused by Escherichia coli in broiler chickens has serious implications on food safety, security, and economic sustainability. Antibiotics are required for treating the disease, while vaccination and biosecurity are used for its prevention. This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted under the COST Action CA18217-European Network for Optimization of Veterinary Antimicrobial Treatment (ENOVAT), aimed to assess the efficacy of E. coli vaccination in broiler production and provide evidence-based recommendations. A comprehensive search of bibliographic databases, including, PubMed, CAB Abstracts, Web of Science and Agricola, yielded 2,722 articles. Following a defined protocol, 39 studies were selected for data extraction. Most of the studies were experimental infection trials, with only three field studies identified, underscoring the need for more field-based research. The selected studies reported various types of vaccines, including killed (n = 5), subunit (n = 8), outer membrane vesicles/protein-based (n = 4), live/live-attenuated (n = 16), and CpG oligodeoxynucleotides (ODN) (n = 6) vaccines. The risk of bias assessment revealed that a significant proportion of studies reporting mortality (92.3%) or feed conversion ratio (94.8%) as outcomes, had "unclear" regarding bias. The meta-analysis, focused on live-attenuated and CpG ODN vaccines, demonstrated a significant trend favoring both vaccination types in reducing mortality. However, the review also highlighted the challenges in reproducing colibacillosis in experimental setups, due to considerable variation in challenge models involving different routes of infection, predisposing factors, and challenge doses. This highlights the need for standardizing the challenge model to facilitate comparisons between studies and ensure consistent evaluation of vaccine candidates. While progress has been made in the development of E. coli vaccines for broilers, further research is needed to address concerns such as limited heterologous protection, practicability for application, evaluation of efficacy in field conditions and adoption of novel approaches.
Topics: Animals; Escherichia coli; Chickens; Poultry Diseases; Escherichia coli Infections; Escherichia coli Vaccines; Vaccination
PubMed: 38517875
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0301029 -
BMC Infectious Diseases Aug 2017Rotavirus was the leading cause of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in infants and young children prior to the introduction of routine vaccination. Since 2006 there have been... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Rotavirus was the leading cause of acute gastroenteritis (AGE) in infants and young children prior to the introduction of routine vaccination. Since 2006 there have been two licensed vaccines available; with successful clinical trials leading the World Health Organization to recommend rotavirus vaccination for all children worldwide. In order to inform immunisation policy we have conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of observation studies to assess population effectiveness against acute gastroenteritis.
METHODS
We systematically searched PubMed, Medline, Web of Science, Cinhal and Academic Search Premier and grey literature sources for studies published between January 2006 and April 2014. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they were observational measuring population effectiveness of rotavirus vaccination against health care attendances for rotavirus gastroenteritis or AGE. To evaluate study quality we use used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for non-randomised studies, categorising studies by risk of bias. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plots. If two or more studies reported a measure of vaccine effectiveness (VE), we conducted a random effects meta-analysis. We stratified analyses by World Bank country income level and used study quality in sensitivity analyses.
RESULTS
We identified 30 studies, 19 were from high-income countries and 11 from middle-income countries. Vaccine effectiveness against hospitalization for laboratory confirmed rotavirus gastroenteritis was highest in high-income countries (89% VE; 95% CI 84-92%) compared to middle-income countries (74% VE; 95% CI 67-80%). Vaccine effectiveness was higher for those receiving the complete vaccine schedule (81% VE; 95% CI 75-86%) compared to partial schedule (62% VE; 95% CI 55-69%). Two studies from high-income countries measured VE against community consultations for AGE with a pooled estimate of 40% (95% CI 13-58%; 2 studies).
CONCLUSIONS
We found strong evidence to further support the continued use of rotavirus vaccines. Vaccine effectiveness was similar to that reported in clinical trials for both high and middle-income countries. There is limited data from Low income settings at present. There was lower effectiveness against milder disease. Further studies, should continue to report effectiveness against AGE and less-severe rotavirus disease because as evidenced by pre-vaccine introduction studies this is likely to contribute the greatest burden on healthcare resources, particularly in high-income countries.
Topics: Developed Countries; Developing Countries; Gastroenteritis; Hospitalization; Humans; Immunization Schedule; Infant; Observational Studies as Topic; Rotavirus Infections; Rotavirus Vaccines; Vaccination; Vaccines, Attenuated
PubMed: 28810833
DOI: 10.1186/s12879-017-2613-4 -
Vaccines Mar 2020Live-attenuated vaccines (LAV) are currently contraindicated during pregnancy, given uncertain safety records for the mother-infant pair. LAV might, however, play an... (Review)
Review
Live-attenuated vaccines (LAV) are currently contraindicated during pregnancy, given uncertain safety records for the mother-infant pair. LAV might, however, play an important role to protect them against serious emerging diseases, such as Ebola and Lassa fever. For this systematic review we searched relevant databases to identify studies published up to November 2019. Controlled observational studies reporting pregnancy outcomes after maternal immunization with LAV were included. The ROBINS-I tool was used to assess risk of bias. Pooled odds ratios (OR) were obtained under a random-effects model. Of 2831 studies identified, fifteen fulfilled inclusion criteria. Smallpox, rubella, poliovirus, yellow fever and dengue vaccines were assessed in these studies. No association was found between vaccination and miscarriage (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87-1.10), stillbirth (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.74-1.48), malformations (OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.98-1.21), prematurity (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.90-1.08) or neonatal death (OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.68-1.65) overall. However, increased odds of malformations (OR 1.24; 95% CI 1.03-1.49) and miscarriage after first trimester immunization (OR 4.82; 95% CI 2.38-9.77) was found for smallpox vaccine. Thus, we did not find evidence of harm related to LAV other than smallpox with regards to pregnancy outcomes, but quality of evidence was very low. Overall risks appear to be small and have to be balanced against potential benefits for the mother-infant pair.
PubMed: 32168941
DOI: 10.3390/vaccines8010124 -
Frontiers in Pediatrics 2022In 2011, the first European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) vaccination recommendations for pediatric patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases...
Efficacy, Immunogenicity and Safety of Vaccination in Pediatric Patients With Autoimmune Inflammatory Rheumatic Diseases (pedAIIRD): A Systematic Literature Review for the 2021 Update of the EULAR/PRES Recommendations.
BACKGROUND
In 2011, the first European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) vaccination recommendations for pediatric patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (pedAIIRD) were published. The past decade numerous new studies were performed to assess the safety, efficacy and immunogenicity of vaccinations in pedAIIRD. A systematic literature review (SLR) was therefore performed to serve as the basis for the updated 2021 EULAR/PRES recommendations.
METHODS
An SLR was performed according to the standard operating procedures for EULAR-endorsed recommendations. Primary outcomes were efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of vaccination in pedAIIRD. The search was performed in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library and included studies published from November 2010 until July 2020.
RESULTS
The SLR yielded 57 studies which were included for critical appraisal and data extraction. Only 8 studies described the occurrence of vaccine-preventable infections after vaccination (efficacy), none of these studies were powered to assess efficacy. The majority of studies assessed (humoral) immune responses as surrogate endpoint for vaccine efficacy. Studies on non-live vaccines showed that these were safe and in general immunogenic. Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (bDMARDs) in general did not significantly reduce seroprotection rates, except for B-cell depleting therapies which severely hampered humoral responses. Four new studies on human papilloma virus vaccination showed that this vaccine was safe and immunogenic in pedAIIRD. Regarding live-attenuated vaccinations, level 1 evidence of the measles mumps rubella (MMR) booster vaccination became available which showed the safety of this booster for patients treated with methotrexate. In addition, level 3 evidence became available that suggested that the MMR and varicella zoster virus (VZV) vaccination for patients on low dose glucocorticosteroids and bDMARDs might be safe as well.
CONCLUSIONS
The past decade, knowledge on the safety and immunogenicity of (live-attenuated) vaccines in pedAIIRD significantly increased. Data on efficacy (infection prevention) remains scarce. The results from this SLR are the basis for the updated EULAR/PRES vaccination recommendations in pedAIIRD.
PubMed: 35874582
DOI: 10.3389/fped.2022.910026 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Dec 2018Salmonella infections are a common bacterial cause of invasive disease in people with sickle cell disease especially children, and are associated with high morbidity and...
BACKGROUND
Salmonella infections are a common bacterial cause of invasive disease in people with sickle cell disease especially children, and are associated with high morbidity and mortality rates. Although available in some centres, people with sickle cell anaemia are not routinely immunized with salmonella vaccines. This is an update of a previously published Cochrane Review.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether routine administration of salmonella vaccines to people with sickle cell disease reduces the morbidity and mortality associated with infection.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group Trials Register which comprises of references identified from comprehensive electronic database searches and handsearches of relevant journals and abstract books of conference proceedings.We also conducted a search of the LILACS database and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (www.who.int/trialsearch) and ClinicalTrials.gov (www.clinicaltrials.gov).Date of most recent searches: 17 October 2018.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We planned to select all randomized controlled trials that compared the use of either the inactivated vaccine or an oral attenuated vaccine with a placebo among people with sickle cell disease. Equally, studies that compared the efficacy of one vaccine type over another were to be selected for the review.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
No trials of salmonella vaccines in people with sickle cell disease were found.
MAIN RESULTS
There is an absence of randomized controlled trial evidence relating to the scope of this review.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
It is expected that salmonella vaccines may be useful in people with sickle cell disease, especially in resource-poor settings where the majority of those who suffer from the condition are found. Unfortunately, there are no randomized controlled trials on the efficacy and safety of the different types of salmonella vaccines in people with sickle cell disease. We conclude that there is a need for a well-designed, adequately-powered, randomized controlled trial to assess the benefits and risks of the different types of salmonella vaccines as a means of improving survival and decreasing mortality from salmonella infections in people with sickle cell disease. However, we believe that there are unlikely to be any trials published in this area, therefore, this review will no longer be regularly updated.
Topics: Anemia, Sickle Cell; Humans; Salmonella Infections; Salmonella Vaccines
PubMed: 30521695
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006975.pub4