SORA

Advancing, promoting and sharing knowledge of health through excellence in teaching, clinical practice and research into the prevention and treatment of illness

Comparing Reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Sutton, N; San Francisco Ramos, A; Beales, E; Smith, D; Ikram, S; Galiza, E; Hsia, Y; Heath, PT (2022) Comparing Reactogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Expert Rev Vaccines, 21 (9). pp. 1301-1318. ISSN 1744-8395 https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2022.2098719
SGUL Authors: Heath, Paul Trafford Beales, Emily Rose San Francisco Ramos, Alberto

[img]
Preview
PDF Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.

Download (9MB) | Preview

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: A number of vaccines have now been developed against COVID-19. Differences in reactogenicity and safety profiles according to the vaccine technologies employed are becoming apparent from clinical trials. METHODS: Five databases (Medline, EMBASE, Science Citation Index, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine COVID-19 vaccine tracker) were searched for relevant randomised controlled trials between 1 January 2020 and 12 January 2022 according to predetermined criteria with no language limitations. RESULTS: Forty-two datasets were identified, with 20 vaccines using four different technologies (viral vector, inactivated, mRNA and protein sub-unit). Adults and adolescents over 12 years were included. Control groups used saline placebos, adjuvants, and comparator vaccines. The most consistently reported solicited adverse events were fever, fatigue, headache, pain at injection site, redness, and swelling. Both doses of mRNA vaccines, the second dose of protein subunit and the first dose of adenovirus vectored vaccines were the most reactogenic, while the inactivated vaccines were the least reactogenic. CONCLUSIONS: The different COVID-19 vaccines currently available appear to have distinct reactogenicity profiles, dependent on the vaccine technology employed. Awareness of these differences may allow targeted recommendations for specific populations. Greater standardization of methods for adverse event reporting will aid future research in this field.

Item Type: Article
Additional Information: © 2022 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
Keywords: Adverse events, COVID-19 Vaccines, Meta-analysis, Reactogenicity, Systematic Review, 1103 Clinical Sciences, 1117 Public Health and Health Services, Virology
SGUL Research Institute / Research Centre: Academic Structure > Infection and Immunity Research Institute (INII)
Journal or Publication Title: Expert Rev Vaccines
ISSN: 1744-8395
Language: eng
Dates:
DateEvent
15 July 2022Published
7 July 2022Published Online
4 July 2022Accepted
Publisher License: Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0
PubMed ID: 35796029
Go to PubMed abstract
URI: https://openaccess.sgul.ac.uk/id/eprint/114525
Publisher's version: https://doi.org/10.1080/14760584.2022.2098719

Actions (login required)

Edit Item Edit Item