Immunogenicity and safety of Ebola virus vaccines in healthy adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Diallo A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8437548 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Oct
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Immunogenicity and safety of Ebola virus vaccines in healthy adults: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Diallo Alhassane A Carlos-Bolumbu Miguel M Cervantes-Gonzalez Minerva M Wozniak Veronika V Diallo Mamadou Hassimiou MH Diallo Boubacar Djelo BD Delamou Alexandre A Galtier Florence F
Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics 20210716 10
Clinical development of Ebola virus vaccines (EVV) was accelerated by the West African Ebola virus epidemic which remains the deadliest in history. To compare and rank the EVV according to their immunogenicity and safety. A total of 21 randomized controlled trial, evaluating seven different vaccines with different doses, and 5,275 participants were analyzed. The rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP (2 × 10 <sup>7</sup>) vaccine was more immunogenic (<i>P</i>-score 0.80). For pain, rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP (≤10 <sup>5</sup>) ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThe 2013-2016 Ebola virus outbreak in West Africa was the most widespread in history. In response, alive attenuated recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus (rVSV) vaccine expressing Zaire Ebolavirus glycoprotein (rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP) was evaluated in humans.MethodsIn a phase 1, randomized, dose-ranging, observer-blind, placebo-controlled trial, healthy adults aged 18-65 years were randomized into 4 groups of 10 to receive one of 3 vaccine doses or placebo. Follow-up visits spanned 180 days postvaccination for safety monitoring, immunogenicity testing and any rVSV virus shedding.ResultsForty participants were injected with rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP vaccine (n = 30) or saline placebo (n = 10). No serious adverse events related to the vaccine or participant withdrawals were reported. Solicited adverse events during the 14-day follow-up period were mild to moderate and self-limited, with the exception of injection-site pain and headache. Viremia following vaccination was transient and no longer detectable after study day 3, with no virus shedding in saliva or urine. All vaccinated participants developed serum immunoglobulin G (IgG), as measured by Ebola virus envelope glycoprotein-based enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Immunogenicity was comparable across all dose groups, and sustained IgG titers were detectable through to the last visit, at study day 180.InterpretationIn this phase 1 study, there were no safety concerns after a single dose of rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP vaccine. IgG ELISA showed persistent high titers at 180 days postimmunization. There was a period of reactogenicity, but in general, the vaccine was well tolerated. This study provides evidence of the safety and immunogenicity of rVSVΔG-ZEBOV-GP vaccine and importance of its further investigation. Trial registration: Clinical-Trials.gov no., NCT02374385.
| S-EPMC5478408 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Older adults are more susceptible to severe health outcomes for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Universal vaccination has become a trend, but there are still doubts and research gaps regarding the COVID-19 vaccination in the elderly. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in older people aged ≥ 55 years and their influencing factors. Methods Randomized controlled trials from inception to April 9, 2022, were systematically searched in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. We estimated summary relative risk (RR), rates, or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effects meta-analysis. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022314456). Results Of the 32 eligible studies, 9, 21, and 25 were analyzed for efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety, respectively. In older adults, vaccination was efficacious against COVID-19 (79.49%, 95% CI: 60.55−89.34), with excellent seroconversion rate (92.64%, 95% CI: 86.77−96.91) and geometric mean titer (GMT) (SMD 3.56, 95% CI: 2.80−4.31) of neutralizing antibodies, and provided a significant protection rate against severe disease (87.01%, 50.80−96.57). Subgroup and meta-regression analyses consistently found vaccine types and the number of doses to be primary influencing factors for efficacy and immunogenicity. Specifically, mRNA vaccines showed the best efficacy (90.72%, 95% CI: 86.82−93.46), consistent with its highest seroconversion rate (98.52%, 95% CI: 93.45−99.98) and GMT (SMD 6.20, 95% CI: 2.02−10.39). Compared to the control groups, vaccination significantly increased the incidence of total adverse events (AEs) (RR 1.59, 95% CI: 1.38−1.83), including most local and systemic AEs, such as pain, fever, chill, etc. For inactivated and DNA vaccines, the incidence of any AEs was similar between vaccination and control groups (p > 0.1), while mRNA vaccines had the highest risk of most AEs (RR range from 1.74 to 7.22). Conclusion COVID-19 vaccines showed acceptable efficacy, immunogenicity and safety in older people, especially providing a high protection rate against severe disease. The mRNA vaccine was the most efficacious, but it is worth surveillance for some AEs it caused. Increased booster coverage in older adults is warranted, and additional studies are urgently required for longer follow-up periods and variant strains.
| S-EPMC9513208 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectivesEmergence of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infections and the resultant disease, COVID-19 led the world into 238 million cases and 4.8 million deaths over the first 22 months of the pandemic. While numerous vaccines have been developed to combat this pandemic, limited literature is available regarding the comparison of these vaccines. This study aims to systematically review and evaluate the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines compared with control arms in the healthy adult population.MethodsA literature search was conducted in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane up to July 4, 2021. Randomized controlled trials assessing the immunogenicity of any dose of COVID-19 vaccine in adults by anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 immunoglobulin G antibodies geometric mean titers (GMTs) and neutralizing antibodies GMT response at 28 days postimmunization compared with the control groups in the healthy adults were considered for inclusion. Groups at day 28 with the highest GMT were further examined for their adverse events.ResultsOf the 341 citations retrieved, 19 were included. This covered a total of 16 vaccines involving 8342 subjects aged between 30.8 and 69.7 years, comprising 52.13% females. All studies reported GMT at or close to 28 days postvaccination compared with placebo and comparator, and 13 of 19 studies reported seroconversion rates. While 15 of 16 vaccines reported adverse events that ranged from mild to severe, 1 of 16 (AD26.COV2.S) noted 1 case of a vaccine-related serious adverse event-high fever 6 hours after vaccination. Local reactions (such as redness, pain, and swelling) and systematic reactions (such as fatigue, fever, and headache) were commonly noted. Safety between vaccines was similar; however, higher rates of severe adverse events were noted in Ad5-vectored COVID-19, AD26.COV2.S, ChAdOx nCoV-19, and mRNA-1273. No all-cause mortality was documented in any vaccines.ConclusionsAll 16 vaccines elicited an immune response substantially higher than the control groups while maintaining tolerable safety profiles.
| S-EPMC8516444 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe 2014 West African outbreak of Ebola virus disease highlighted the urgent need to develop an effective Ebola vaccine.MethodsWe undertook 2 phase 1 studies assessing safety and immunogenicity of the viral vector modified vaccinia Ankara virus vectored Ebola Zaire vaccine (MVA-EBO-Z), manufactured rapidly on a new duck cell line either alone or in a heterologous prime-boost regimen with recombinant chimpanzee adenovirus type 3 vectored Ebola Zaire vaccine (ChAd3-EBO-Z) followed by MVA-EBO-Z. Adult volunteers in the United Kingdom (n = 38) and Senegal (n = 40) were vaccinated and an accelerated 1-week prime-boost regimen was assessed in Senegal. Safety was assessed by active and passive collection of local and systemic adverse events.ResultsThe standard and accelerated heterologous prime-boost regimens were well-tolerated and elicited potent cellular and humoral immunogenicity in the United Kingdom and Senegal, but vaccine-induced antibody responses were significantly lower in Senegal. Cellular immune responses measured by flow cytometry were significantly greater in African vaccinees receiving ChAd3 and MVA vaccines in the same rather than the contralateral limb.ConclusionsMVA biomanufactured on an immortalized duck cell line shows potential for very large-scale manufacturing with lower cost of goods. This first trial of MVA-EBO-Z in humans encourages further testing in phase 2 studies, with the 1-week prime-boost interval regimen appearing to be particularly suitable for outbreak control.Clinical trials registrationNCT02451891; NCT02485912.
| S-EPMC6452431 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Several vaccines against chikungunya fever have been developed and tested, and one has been recently licensed. We performed a meta-analysis to estimate the immunogenicity and safety of all chikungunya vaccines that have been progressed to clinical trial evaluation (VLA1553; mRNA-1388/VAL-181388; PXVX0317/VRC-CHKVLP059-00-VP; ChAdOx1 Chik; MV-CHIK). We included trials retrieved from MedLine, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The outcomes were the rates of seroconversion/seroresponse and serious adverse events (SAEs) after the primary immunization course. We retrieved a total of 14 datasets, including >4000 participants. All candidate chikungunya vaccines were able to elicit an immunogenic response in ≥96% of vaccinated subjects, regardless of the vaccination schedule and platform used, and the seroconversion/seroresponse rates remained high 6 to 12 months after vaccination for most vaccines. Four of the five candidate vaccines showed a good overall safety profile (no data were available for ChAdOx1 Chik), with no significant increase in the risk of SAEs among the vaccinated, and a low absolute risk of product-related SAEs. Overall, the present findings support the potential use of the candidate vaccines for the prevention of chikungunya and the current indication for use in adult travelers to endemic regions of the licensed VLA 1553 vaccine. In order to extend chikungunya vaccination to a wider audience, further studies are needed on individuals from endemic countries and frail populations.
| S-EPMC11436237 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionCOVID-19 has spread with high morbidity and mortality worldwide. Many inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are being tested at various clinical trial stages for the control and prevention of COVID-19. We aim to comprehensively and objectively evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccines in healthy individuals through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs).Methods and analysisWe will search electronic databases of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and EMBASE for RCTs from inception to 31 December 2021. We will also search conference abstracts, reference lists, and grey literature of all available records. Two reviewers will independently screen and extract information from the literature. Bias and the quality of included studies will be evaluated with the risk-bias assessment tool provided by the Cochrane Collaboration. Statistical analysis will be performed using Cochrane's Review Manager (RevMan), V.5.3.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval and patient informed consent are not required because we will be including published literature only. The findings of this research will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and likely through other scientific events such as conferences, seminars and symposia.Prospero registration numberCRD42021266285.
| S-EPMC8573293 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccination is considered the most effective and economical measure for controlling infectious diseases. Although combination vaccines are widely used worldwide, whether any of the combination vaccines is superior to each separate vaccine has yet to be established. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to summarize the available evidence on the effectiveness and safety of combination vaccines in children. A systematic search was conducted from database inception to August 20, 2021, in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Scopus. Published randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and open-label trials of immunogenicity and safety of combined vaccines were selected. The results of the studies were quantitatively synthesized. Overall, 25 articles met the inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The results indicated that the combined diptheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis (DTaP)-hepatitis B virus (HBV)-Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib) vaccine group had lower levels of anti-tetanus antibodies than the combined DTaP-HBV and separate Hib vaccinations group (SMD = -0.23; 95% CI: -0.42, -0.05; p = 0.013). Meanwhile, the combined DTaP-HBV-inactivated polio virus (IPV)-Hib vaccine group had higher levels of anti-pertussis (PT) and anti-filamentous hemagglutinin (FHA) antibodies than the combined DTaP-IPV-Hib and separate HBV vaccinations group (anti-PT: SMD = 0.60; 95% CI: 0.45, 0.75; p < 0.0001; anti-FHA: SMD = 0.40; 95% CI: 0.01, 0.78; p = 0.042). The levels of anti-pertactin (PRN) antibodies were lower in the combined DTaP-IPV-Hib vaccine group than in the combined DTaP-IPV and separate Hib vaccinations group (SMD = -0.13; 95% CI: -0.27, -0.00; p = 0.047). The individuals injected with the DTaP-HBV-IPV-Hib vaccine had a lower risk of pain and swelling than those injected with the combined DTaP-HBV-IPV and separate Hib vaccines (pain: RR = 0.79; 95% CI: 0.69, 0.91; p = 0.001; swelling: RR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.78, 0.98; p = 0.020). However, the group that received the DTaP-HBV-IPV-Hib vaccine had a higher risk of fever than the group that received DTaP-HBV-IPV and separate Hib vaccinations (RR = 1.13; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.26; p = 0.021). This meta-analysis suggests that the combined vaccines (DTaP-IPV-Hib, DTaP-HBV-Hib, DTaP-HBV-IPV-Hib) are safe, well-tolerated, and provide immunogenic alternatives to separate vaccines in children. The combined DTaP-HBV-IPV-Hib vaccine showed a higher incidence of fever, which was lower than the cumulative incidence of fever induced by all vaccines. Future studies should evaluate the cost-effectiveness of using combined vaccines and compare the potency of different formulations to improve routine local or national childhood immunization programs.
| S-EPMC8954135 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRespiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is garnering increasing attention, with a growing number of subunit RSV vaccines under active clinical investigation. However, comprehensive evidence is limited.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search across PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception to 12 January 2024, focusing on published randomized controlled trials (RCTs).ResultsA total of 17 studies were included, encompassing assessments of efficacy (5 studies), safety (17 studies), and immunogenicity (12 studies) of RSV subunit vaccines. The pooled risk ratio (RR) for RSV-associated acute respiratory infection (RSV-ARI) with subunit vaccines was 0.31 (95% CI: 0.23-0.43), for RSV-associated lower respiratory tract infection (RSV-LRTI), it was 0.32 (95% CI: 0.22-0.44), and for severe RSV-LRTI (RSV-SLRTI), it was 0.13 (95% CI: 0.06-0.29). There was no significant difference in serious adverse events (SAEs) between the vaccine and placebo groups, with a pooled RR of 1.05 (95% CI: 0.98-1.14). The pooled standardized mean difference (SMD) for the geometric mean titer (GMT) of neutralizing antibodies was 2.89 (95% CI: 2.43-3.35).ConclusionSubunit RSV vaccines exhibit strong efficacy, favorable safety profiles, and robust immunogenicity. Future research should focus on the cost-effectiveness of various vaccines to enhance regional and national immunization strategies.
| S-EPMC11360664 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRespiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is a leading cause of acute lower respiratory infection globally. There are vaccine candidates in development, but a systematic review on immunogenicity and safety of vaccine is lacking.MethodsThis systematic review of RSV vaccine clinical trials was undertaken using four databases. Searches were conducted using both controlled vocabulary terms such as "Respiratory Syncytial Virus, Human," "Respiratory Syncytial Virus Infections," "Respiratory Syncytial Virus Vaccines," "Immunization," "Immunization Programs" and "Vaccines" and corresponding text word terms. The included studies were limited to clinical trials published from January 2000 to 31 December 2020. RSV infection case was defined as RSV-associated medically attended acute respiratory illness (MAARI) or RSV infection by serologically confirmed test (Western blot) during the RSV surveillance period. We calculated the relative risk of each vaccine trial with RSV infection case.ResultsOf 6306 publications, 38 were included and data were extracted covering four major types of RSV vaccine candidates, these being live-attenuated/chimeric (n = 14), recombinant-vector (n = 6), subunit (n = 12) and nanoparticle vaccines (n = 6). For RSV infection cases, nine trials were involved and none of them showed a vaccine-related increased MAARI during RSV surveillance season.ConclusionLID ∆M2-2, MEDI M2-2, RSVcps2 and LID/∆M2-2 /1030s (live-attenuated) were considered the most promising vaccine candidates in infant and children. In the elderly, a nanoparticle F vaccine candidate and Ad26.RSV.preF were considered as two potential effective vaccines. A promising maternal vaccine candidate is still lacking.
| S-EPMC8189192 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We aimed to summarize reliable medical evidence by the meta-analysis of all published clinical trials that investigated the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of vaccine candidates against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and medRxiv databases were used to select the studies. 7094 articles were identified initially and 43 were retrieved for more detailed evaluation. 5 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials were selected. A total of 1604 subjects with either vaccines or placebo infections were included in the meta-analysis within the scope of these articles. According to the results, there is an increase in total adverse events for subjects with either low (95% CI: 1.90-4.29) or high (CI: 2.65-5.63) dose vaccination. The adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccine are mainly local ones including pain, itching, and redness, and no significant difference was identified in the systemic reactions. All adverse effects were transient and resolved within a few days. Moreover, the neutralizing and IgG antibody levels post different dose vaccinations were all significantly increased at day 14/21 (P = 0.0004 and P = 0.0003, respectively) and day 28/35 (P < 0.00001) in vaccine groups compared to placebo controls. Besides, the levels of neutralizing and IgG antibodies were also elevated significantly at from day 14 to 35, versus day 0 (All P < 0.001). In conclusion, our analysis suggests that the current COVID-19 vaccine candidates are safe, tolerated, and immunogenic, which provides important information for further development, evaluation, and clinical application of COVID-19 vaccine.
| S-EPMC7654888 | biostudies-literature