Suppr超能文献

新冠病毒疫苗Ⅲ期试验的疗效与安全性:一项荟萃分析

Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines in Phase III Trials: A Meta-Analysis.

作者信息

Cheng Haoyue, Peng Zhicheng, Luo Wenliang, Si Shuting, Mo Minjia, Zhou Haibo, Xin Xing, Liu Hui, Yu Yunxian

机构信息

Department of Public Health and Department of Anesthesiology, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou 310009, China.

Department of Epidemiology & Health Statistics, School of Public Health, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China.

出版信息

Vaccines (Basel). 2021 Jun 1;9(6):582. doi: 10.3390/vaccines9060582.

Abstract

Nowadays, the vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines is being promoted worldwide, professionals and common people are very concerned about the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines. No published systematic review and meta-analysis has assessed the efficacy and safety of the COVID-19 vaccines based on data from phase III clinical trials. Therefore, this study has estimated the efficacy and safety of COVID-19 vaccines and the differences between vaccine types. PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, CNKI, Wanfang, medRxiv databases and two websites were used to retrieve the studies. Random-effects models were used to estimate the pooled efficacy and safety with risk ratio (RR). A total of eight studies, seven COVID-19 vaccines and 158,204 subjects were included in the meta-analysis. All the vaccines had a good preventive effect on COVID-19 (RR = 0.17, 95% CI: 0.09-0.32), and the mRNA vaccine (RR = 0.05, 95% CI: 0.03-0.09) was the most effective against COVID-19, while the inactivated vaccine (RR = 0.32, 95% CI: 0.19-0.54) was the least. In terms of safety, the risk of overall adverse events showed an increase in the vaccine group after the first (RR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.03-2.05) or second (RR = 1.52, 95% CI: 1.04-2.20) injection. However, compared with the first injection, the risk of local (RR = 2.64, 95% CI: 1.02-6.83 vs. RR = 2.25, 95% CI: 0.52-9.75) and systemic (RR = 1.33, 95% CI: 1.21-1.46 vs. RR = 1.59, 95% CI: 0.84-3.01) adverse events decreased after the second injection. As for the mRNA vaccine, the risk of overall adverse events increased significantly, compared with the placebo, no matter whether it was the first (RR = 1.83, 95% CI = 1.80-1.86) or the second (RR = 2.16, 95% CI = 2.11-2.20) injection. All the COVID-19 vaccines that have published the data of phase III clinical trials have excellent efficacy, and the risk of adverse events is acceptable. The mRNA vaccines were the most effective against COVID-19, meanwhile the risk and grade of adverse events was minimal, compared to that of severe symptoms induced by COVID-19.

摘要

如今,新冠疫苗接种正在全球范围内推广,专业人士和普通民众都非常关注新冠疫苗的疗效和安全性。目前尚无已发表的系统评价和荟萃分析基于Ⅲ期临床试验数据评估新冠疫苗的疗效和安全性。因此,本研究评估了新冠疫苗的疗效和安全性以及不同疫苗类型之间的差异。通过检索PubMed、Embase、Cochrane图书馆、中国知网、万方、medRxiv数据库以及两个网站获取相关研究。采用随机效应模型以风险比(RR)估计合并疗效和安全性。荟萃分析共纳入8项研究、7种新冠疫苗和158,204名受试者。所有疫苗对新冠病毒均有良好的预防效果(RR = 0.17,95%CI:0.09 - 0.32),其中mRNA疫苗对新冠病毒的预防效果最佳(RR = 0.05,95%CI:0.03 - 0.09),灭活疫苗预防效果最差(RR = 0.32,95%CI:0.19 - 0.54)。在安全性方面,首次(RR = 1.46,95%CI:1.03 - 2.05)或第二次(RR = 1.52,95%CI:1.04 - 2.20)注射疫苗后,疫苗组总体不良事件风险增加。然而,与首次注射相比,第二次注射后局部(RR = 2.64,95%CI:1.02 - 6.83对比RR = 2.25,95%CI:0.52 - 9.75)和全身(RR = 1.33,95%CI:1.21 - 1.46对比RR = 1.59,95%CI:0.84 - 3.01)不良事件风险降低。对于mRNA疫苗,无论首次(RR = 1.83,95%CI = 1.80 - 1.86)还是第二次(RR = 2.16,95%CI = 2.11 - 2.20)注射,与安慰剂相比,总体不良事件风险均显著增加。所有已发表Ⅲ期临床试验数据的新冠疫苗均具有良好疗效,不良事件风险在可接受范围内。mRNA疫苗对新冠病毒预防效果最佳,同时与新冠病毒所致严重症状相比,其不良事件风险和严重程度最低。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/033a/8228087/c1afbfd37591/vaccines-09-00582-g001.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验