Irving Greg J, Holden John, Yang Rongrong, Pope Daniel
Division of Primary Care, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Jul 11;2012(7):CD009051. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009051.pub2.
In many parts of the world, hepatitis A infection represents a significant cause of morbidity and socio-economic loss. Whilst hepatitis A vaccines have the potential to prevent disease, the degree of protection afforded against clinical outcomes and within different populations remains uncertain. There are two types of hepatitis A virus (HAV) vaccine, inactivated and live attenuated. It is important to determine the efficacy and safety for both vaccine types.
To determine the clinical protective efficacy, sero-protective efficacy, and safety and harms of hepatitis A vaccination in persons not previously exposed to hepatitis A.
We searched The Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) up to November 2011.
Randomised clinical trials comparing HAV vaccine with placebo, no intervention, or appropriate control vaccines in participants of all ages.
Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were undertaken by two authors and verified by a third author. Where required, authors contacted investigators to obtain missing data. The primary outcome was the occurrence of clinically apparent hepatitis A (infectious hepatitis). The secondary outcomes were lack of sero-protective anti-HAV immunoglobulin G (IgG), and number and types of adverse events. Results were presented as relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Dichotomous outcomes were reported as risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI), using intention-to-treat analysis. We conducted assessment of risk of bias to evaluate the risk of systematic errors (bias) and trial sequential analyses to estimate the risk of random errors (the play of chance).
We included a total of 11 clinical studies, of which only three were considered to have low risk of bias; two were quasi-randomised studies in which we only addressed harms. Nine randomised trials with 732,380 participants addressed the primary outcome of clinically confirmed hepatitis A. Of these, four trials assessed the inactivated hepatitis A vaccine (41,690 participants) and five trials assessed the live attenuated hepatitis A vaccine (690,690 participants). In the three randomised trials with low risk of bias (all assessing inactivated vaccine), clinically apparent hepatitis A occurred in 9/20,684 (0.04%) versus 92/20,746 (0.44%) participants in the HAV vaccine and control groups respectively (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.30). In all nine randomised trials, clinically apparent hepatitis A occurred in 31/375,726 (0.01%) versus 505/356,654 (0.18%) participants in the HAV vaccine and control groups respectively (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.17). These results were supported by trial sequential analyses. Subgroup analyses confirmed the clinical effectiveness of both inactivated hepatitis A vaccines (RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.30) and live attenuated hepatitis A vaccines (RR 0.07, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.17) on clinically confirmed hepatitis A. Inactivated hepatitis A vaccines had a significant effect on reducing the lack of sero-protection (less than 20 mIU/L) (RR 0.01, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.03). No trial reported on a sero-protective threshold less than 10 mIU/L. The risk of both non-serious local and systemic adverse events was comparable to placebo for the inactivated HAV vaccines. There were insufficient data to draw conclusions on adverse events for the live attenuated HAV vaccine.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Hepatitis A vaccines are effective for pre-exposure prophylaxis of hepatitis A in susceptible individuals. This review demonstrated significant protection for at least two years with the inactivated HAV vaccine and at least five years with the live attenuated HAV vaccine. There was evidence to support the safety of the inactivated hepatitis A vaccine. More high quality evidence is required to determine the safety of live attenuated vaccines.
在世界许多地区,甲型肝炎感染是发病和社会经济损失的一个重要原因。虽然甲型肝炎疫苗有预防疾病的潜力,但针对临床结局以及在不同人群中的保护程度仍不确定。有两种甲型肝炎病毒(HAV)疫苗,即灭活疫苗和减毒活疫苗。确定这两种疫苗类型的疗效和安全性很重要。
确定甲型肝炎疫苗对既往未接触过甲型肝炎的人群的临床保护效力、血清保护效力以及安全性和危害。
我们检索了截至2011年11月的Cochrane肝胆疾病组对照试验注册库、Cochrane图书馆中的Cochrane系统评价对照试验中心注册库(CENTRAL)、MEDLINE、EMBASE、科学引文索引扩展版以及中国知网(CNKI)。
在所有年龄段参与者中,比较HAV疫苗与安慰剂、无干预措施或适当对照疫苗的随机临床试验。
由两位作者进行数据提取和偏倚风险评估,并由第三位作者进行核实。如有需要,作者联系研究者以获取缺失数据。主要结局是临床显性甲型肝炎(传染性肝炎)的发生情况。次要结局是缺乏血清保护性抗-HAV免疫球蛋白G(IgG),以及不良事件的数量和类型。结果以相对危险度(RR)及95%置信区间(CI)表示。二分法结局报告为风险比(RR)及95%置信区间(CI),采用意向性分析。我们进行了偏倚风险评估以评估系统误差(偏倚)风险,并进行了试验序贯分析以估计随机误差(机遇的作用)风险。
我们共纳入了11项临床研究,其中只有3项被认为偏倚风险较低;2项为半随机研究,我们仅分析了其危害。9项随机试验纳入了732,380名参与者,探讨了临床确诊甲型肝炎的主要结局。其中,4项试验评估了甲型肝炎灭活疫苗(41,690名参与者),5项试验评估了甲型肝炎减毒活疫苗(690,690名参与者)。在3项偏倚风险较低的随机试验中(均评估灭活疫苗),甲型肝炎灭活疫苗组和对照组中分别有9/20,684(0.04%)和92/20,746(0.44%)的参与者发生临床显性甲型肝炎(RR 0.09,95%CI 0.03至0.30)。在所有9项随机试验中,甲型肝炎灭活疫苗组和对照组中分别有31/375,726(0.01%)和505/356,654(0.18%)的参与者发生临床显性甲型肝炎(RR 0.09,95%CI 0.05至0.17)。试验序贯分析支持了这些结果。亚组分析证实了甲型肝炎灭活疫苗(RR 0.09,95%CI 0.03至0.30)和甲型肝炎减毒活疫苗(RR 0.07,95%CI 0.03至0.17)对临床确诊甲型肝炎的临床有效性。甲型肝炎灭活疫苗对减少血清保护不足(低于20 mIU/L)有显著效果(RR 0.01,95%CI 0.00至0.03)。没有试验报告血清保护阈值低于10 mIU/L的情况。甲型肝炎灭活疫苗的非严重局部和全身不良事件风险与安慰剂相当。关于甲型肝炎减毒活疫苗的不良事件,数据不足,无法得出结论。
甲型肝炎疫苗对易感个体进行甲型肝炎暴露前预防有效。本综述表明,甲型肝炎灭活疫苗至少可提供两年的显著保护,甲型肝炎减毒活疫苗至少可提供五年的显著保护。有证据支持甲型肝炎灭活疫苗的安全性。需要更多高质量证据来确定减毒活疫苗的安全性。