Safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials

IF 9 2区 医学 Q1 VIROLOGY Reviews in Medical Virology Pub Date : 2023-12-29 DOI:10.1002/rmv.2507
Jayesh Beladiya, Anup Kumar, Yogesh Vasava, Krupanshu Parmar, Dipanshi Patel, Sandip Patel, Sandip Dholakia, Devang Sheth, Sai H. S. Boddu, Chirag Patel
{"title":"Safety and efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled and randomized clinical trials","authors":"Jayesh Beladiya, Anup Kumar, Yogesh Vasava, Krupanshu Parmar, Dipanshi Patel, Sandip Patel, Sandip Dholakia, Devang Sheth, Sai H. S. Boddu, Chirag Patel","doi":"10.1002/rmv.2507","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been discovered within a very small duration of time as compared to the traditional way for the development of vaccines, which raised the question about the safety and efficacy of the approved vaccines. The purpose of this study is to look at the effectiveness and safety of vaccine platforms against the incidence of COVID-19. The literature search was performed on PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, and clinical trials.gov databases for studies published between 1 January 2020 and 19 February 2022. Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis Statement guidelines were followed. Among 284 articles received by keywords, a total of 11 studies were eligible according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria (studies in special populations, e.g., pregnant women, paediatric patients, editorials, case reports, review articles, preclinical and in vitro studies) of the study. A total of 247,186 participants were considered for randomisation at baseline, among them, 129,572 (52.42%) were provided with vaccine (Intervention group) and 117,614 (47.58%) with the placebo (Control group). A pooled fold change estimation of 0.19 (95% CI: 0.12–0.31, <i>p</i> &lt; 0.0001) showed significant protection against the incidence of COVID-19 in the vaccines received group versus the placebo group. mRNA based, inactivated vaccines and non-replicating viral vector-based vaccines showed significantly protection against the incidence of COVID-19 compared to placebo with pooled fold change estimation was 0.08 (95% CI: 0.06–0.10), 0.20 (95% CI: 0.14–0.29) and 0.36 (95% CI: 0.28–0.46), respectively. Injection site discomfort and fatigue were the most common side effect observed in mRNA, non-replicating viral vector, inactivated, and protein subunit-based vaccines. All the approved vaccines were found safe and efficacious but mRNA-based vaccines were found to be more efficacious against SARS-CoV-2 than other platforms.","PeriodicalId":21180,"journal":{"name":"Reviews in Medical Virology","volume":"32 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":9.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Reviews in Medical Virology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2507","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"VIROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Vaccines against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have been discovered within a very small duration of time as compared to the traditional way for the development of vaccines, which raised the question about the safety and efficacy of the approved vaccines. The purpose of this study is to look at the effectiveness and safety of vaccine platforms against the incidence of COVID-19. The literature search was performed on PubMed/Medline, Cochrane, and clinical trials.gov databases for studies published between 1 January 2020 and 19 February 2022. Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Review and Meta-Analysis Statement guidelines were followed. Among 284 articles received by keywords, a total of 11 studies were eligible according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria (studies in special populations, e.g., pregnant women, paediatric patients, editorials, case reports, review articles, preclinical and in vitro studies) of the study. A total of 247,186 participants were considered for randomisation at baseline, among them, 129,572 (52.42%) were provided with vaccine (Intervention group) and 117,614 (47.58%) with the placebo (Control group). A pooled fold change estimation of 0.19 (95% CI: 0.12–0.31, p < 0.0001) showed significant protection against the incidence of COVID-19 in the vaccines received group versus the placebo group. mRNA based, inactivated vaccines and non-replicating viral vector-based vaccines showed significantly protection against the incidence of COVID-19 compared to placebo with pooled fold change estimation was 0.08 (95% CI: 0.06–0.10), 0.20 (95% CI: 0.14–0.29) and 0.36 (95% CI: 0.28–0.46), respectively. Injection site discomfort and fatigue were the most common side effect observed in mRNA, non-replicating viral vector, inactivated, and protein subunit-based vaccines. All the approved vaccines were found safe and efficacious but mRNA-based vaccines were found to be more efficacious against SARS-CoV-2 than other platforms.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
COVID-19 疫苗的安全性和有效性:对照和随机临床试验的系统回顾和荟萃分析
与传统的疫苗研发方式相比,2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)疫苗的发现时间非常短,这就对已批准疫苗的安全性和有效性提出了质疑。本研究的目的是了解针对 COVID-19 发病率的疫苗平台的有效性和安全性。文献检索在 PubMed/Medline、Cochrane 和 clinical trials.gov 数据库中进行,检索 2020 年 1 月 1 日至 2022 年 2 月 19 日期间发表的研究。检索遵循了《系统综述和元分析声明的首选报告项目》指南。在通过关键词收到的 284 篇文章中,根据研究的纳入和排除标准(特殊人群研究,如孕妇、儿科患者、社论、病例报告、综述文章、临床前和体外研究),共有 11 项研究符合条件。共有 247,186 名参与者在基线时接受了随机分配,其中 129,572 人(52.42%)接种了疫苗(干预组),117,614 人(47.58%)接种了安慰剂(对照组)。汇总的折叠变化估计值为 0.19 (95% CI: 0.12-0.31, p < 0.0001),表明接种疫苗组与安慰剂组相比,对 COVID-19 的发病率有显著的保护作用。与安慰剂相比,基于mRNA的灭活疫苗和基于非复制病毒载体的疫苗对COVID-19的发病率有显著的保护作用,集合折叠变化估计值分别为0.08(95% CI:0.06-0.10)、0.20(95% CI:0.14-0.29)和0.36(95% CI:0.28-0.46)。注射部位不适和疲劳是 mRNA 疫苗、非复制病毒载体疫苗、灭活疫苗和蛋白亚单位疫苗最常见的副作用。所有获批疫苗均安全有效,但 mRNA 疫苗对 SARS-CoV-2 的疗效优于其他平台。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Reviews in Medical Virology
Reviews in Medical Virology 医学-病毒学
CiteScore
21.40
自引率
0.90%
发文量
88
期刊介绍: Reviews in Medical Virology aims to provide articles reviewing conceptual or technological advances in diverse areas of virology. The journal covers topics such as molecular biology, cell biology, replication, pathogenesis, immunology, immunization, epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment of viruses of medical importance, and COVID-19 research. The journal has an Impact Factor of 6.989 for the year 2020. The readership of the journal includes clinicians, virologists, medical microbiologists, molecular biologists, infectious disease specialists, and immunologists. Reviews in Medical Virology is indexed and abstracted in databases such as CABI, Abstracts in Anthropology, ProQuest, Embase, MEDLINE/PubMed, ProQuest Central K-494, SCOPUS, and Web of Science et,al.
期刊最新文献
Acute Post-Measles Encephalitis in a Returning Traveller: Highlighting the Need for MMR Vaccination. Crosstalk Between Innate Immunity and Autophagy in Viral Myocarditis Leading to Dilated Cardiomyopathy. Interplays Between Matrix Metalloproteinases and Neurotropic Viruses: An Overview. The Assessment of Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Antibodies in Different Vaccine Platforms: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of COVID-19 Vaccine Clinical Trial Studies. Underlying Factors Predisposing to Viral-Induced Neurological Diseases.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1