tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
BMC Infect Dis
. 2024 Feb 21;24(1):234.
doi: 10.1186/s12879-023-08754-3. Comparative efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in phase III trials: a network meta-analysis
Xiaodi Wu[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ke Xu[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ping Zhan[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Hongbing Liu[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Fang Zhang[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Yong Song[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Tangfeng Lv[SUP] 5 6 [/SUP]
Affiliations
Background: Over a dozen vaccines are in or have completed phase III trials at an unprecedented speed since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic. In this review, we aimed to compare and rank these vaccines indirectly in terms of efficacy and safety using a network meta-analysis.
Methods: We searched Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library for phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their inception to September 30, 2023. Two investigators independently selected articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Outcomes included efficacy in preventing symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) according to vaccine type and individual vaccines in adults and elderly individuals. The risk ratio and mean differences were calculated with 95% confidence intervals using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Results: A total of 25 RCTs involving 22 vaccines were included in the study. None of vaccines had a higher incidence of SAEs than the placebo. Inactivated virus vaccines might be the safest, with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 0.16. BIV1-CovIran showed the highest safety index (SUCRA value: 0.13), followed by BBV152, Soberana, Gam-COVID-Vac, and ZF2001. There were no significant differences among the various types of vaccines regarding the efficacy in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, although there was a trend toward higher efficacy of the mRNA vaccines (SUCRA value: 0.09). BNT162b2 showed the highest efficacy (SUCRA value: 0.02) among the individual vaccines, followed by mRNA-1273, Abdala, Gam-COVID-Vac, and NVX-CoV2373. BNT162b2 had the highest efficacy (SUCRA value: 0.08) in the elderly population, whereas CVnCoV, CoVLP + AS03, and CoronaVac were not significantly different from the placebo.
Conclusions: None of the different types of vaccines were significantly superior in terms of efficacy, while mRNA vaccines were significantly inferior in safety to other types. BNT162b2 had the highest efficacy in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults and the elderly, whereas BIV1-CovIran had the lowest incidence of SAEs in adults.
Keywords: COVID-19; Efficacy; Network Meta-Analysis; SARS-CoV-2; Vaccine.
. 2024 Feb 21;24(1):234.
doi: 10.1186/s12879-023-08754-3. Comparative efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in phase III trials: a network meta-analysis
Xiaodi Wu[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ke Xu[SUP] #[/SUP][SUP] 1 [/SUP], Ping Zhan[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Hongbing Liu[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Fang Zhang[SUP] 2 [/SUP], Yong Song[SUP] 3 4 [/SUP], Tangfeng Lv[SUP] 5 6 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 38383356
- DOI: 10.1186/s12879-023-08754-3
Background: Over a dozen vaccines are in or have completed phase III trials at an unprecedented speed since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic. In this review, we aimed to compare and rank these vaccines indirectly in terms of efficacy and safety using a network meta-analysis.
Methods: We searched Embase, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library for phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from their inception to September 30, 2023. Two investigators independently selected articles, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Outcomes included efficacy in preventing symptomatic severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and the incidence of serious adverse events (SAEs) according to vaccine type and individual vaccines in adults and elderly individuals. The risk ratio and mean differences were calculated with 95% confidence intervals using a Bayesian network meta-analysis.
Results: A total of 25 RCTs involving 22 vaccines were included in the study. None of vaccines had a higher incidence of SAEs than the placebo. Inactivated virus vaccines might be the safest, with a surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value of 0.16. BIV1-CovIran showed the highest safety index (SUCRA value: 0.13), followed by BBV152, Soberana, Gam-COVID-Vac, and ZF2001. There were no significant differences among the various types of vaccines regarding the efficacy in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection, although there was a trend toward higher efficacy of the mRNA vaccines (SUCRA value: 0.09). BNT162b2 showed the highest efficacy (SUCRA value: 0.02) among the individual vaccines, followed by mRNA-1273, Abdala, Gam-COVID-Vac, and NVX-CoV2373. BNT162b2 had the highest efficacy (SUCRA value: 0.08) in the elderly population, whereas CVnCoV, CoVLP + AS03, and CoronaVac were not significantly different from the placebo.
Conclusions: None of the different types of vaccines were significantly superior in terms of efficacy, while mRNA vaccines were significantly inferior in safety to other types. BNT162b2 had the highest efficacy in preventing symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection in adults and the elderly, whereas BIV1-CovIran had the lowest incidence of SAEs in adults.
Keywords: COVID-19; Efficacy; Network Meta-Analysis; SARS-CoV-2; Vaccine.