Suppr超能文献

异源加强免疫与同源加强免疫对 SARS-CoV-2 疫苗有效性和安全性的比较:系统评价和荟萃分析。

Comparison of the Effectiveness and Safety of Heterologous Booster Doses with Homologous Booster Doses for SARS-CoV-2 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, School of Public Health, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.

Institute for Global Health and Development, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.

出版信息

Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022 Aug 29;19(17):10752. doi: 10.3390/ijerph191710752.

Abstract

As vaccine resources were distributed unevenly worldwide, sometimes there might have been shortages or delays in vaccine supply; therefore, considering the use of heterogeneous booster doses for Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) might be an alternative strategy. Therefore, we aimed to review the data available to evaluate and compare the effectiveness and safety of heterologous booster doses with homologous booster doses for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccines. We searched relevant studies up to 27 April 2022. Random-effects inverse variance models were used to evaluate the vaccine effectiveness (VE) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) of COVID-19 outcomes and odds ratio (OR) and its CI of safety events. The Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale and Cochrane Collaboration's tool were used to assess the quality of the included cohort studies. A total of 23 studies involving 1,726,506 inoculation cases of homologous booster dose and 5,343,580 inoculation cases of heterologous booster dose was included. The VE of heterologous booster for the prevention of SARS-CoV-2 infection (VE = 96.10%, VE = 84.00%), symptomatic COVID-19 (VE = 56.80%, VE = 17.30%), and COVID-19-related hospital admissions (VE = 97.40%, VE = 93.20%) was higher than homologous booster. Compared with homologous booster group, there was a higher risk of fever (OR = 1.930, 95% CI, 1.199-3.107), myalgia (OR = 1.825, 95% CI, 1.079-3.089), and malaise or fatigue (OR = 1.745, 95% CI, 1.047-2.906) within 7 days after boosting, and a higher risk of malaise or fatigue (OR = 4.140, 95% CI, 1.729-9.916) within 28 days after boosting in heterologous booster group. Compared with homologous booster group, geometric mean neutralizing titers (GMTs) of neutralizing antibody for different SARS-CoV-2 variants and response rate of antibody and gama interferon were higher in heterologous booster group. Our findings suggested that both homologous and heterologous COVID-19 booster doses had great effectiveness, immunogenicity, and acceptable safety, and a heterologous booster dose was more effective, which would help make appropriate public health decisions and reduce public hesitancy in vaccination.

摘要

由于疫苗资源在全球分布不均,有时疫苗供应可能会短缺或延迟;因此,考虑使用不同种类的加强针来预防 2019 年冠状病毒病(COVID-19)可能是一种替代策略。因此,我们旨在综述现有数据,以评估和比较同源和异源加强针对严重急性呼吸综合征冠状病毒 2(SARS-CoV-2)疫苗的有效性和安全性。我们检索了截至 2022 年 4 月 27 日的相关研究。使用随机效应逆方差模型评估 COVID-19 结局的疫苗有效性(VE)及其 95%置信区间(CI),以及安全性事件的比值比(OR)及其 CI。使用纽卡斯尔-渥太华质量评估量表和 Cochrane 协作工具评估纳入的队列研究的质量。共纳入 23 项研究,涉及同源加强针接种 1726506 例,异源加强针接种 5343580 例。异源加强针预防 SARS-CoV-2 感染(VE=96.10%,VE=84.00%)、有症状 COVID-19(VE=56.80%,VE=17.30%)和 COVID-19 相关住院治疗(VE=97.40%,VE=93.20%)的效果高于同源加强针。与同源加强针组相比,异源加强针组在接种后 7 天内发热(OR=1.930,95%CI,1.199-3.107)、肌痛(OR=1.825,95%CI,1.079-3.089)和不适或疲劳(OR=1.745,95%CI,1.047-2.906)的风险更高,在接种后 28 天内不适或疲劳(OR=4.140,95%CI,1.729-9.916)的风险更高。与同源加强针组相比,异源加强针组针对不同 SARS-CoV-2 变异体的中和抗体几何平均滴度(GMT)和抗体及伽马干扰素的反应率更高。我们的研究结果表明,同源和异源 COVID-19 加强针均具有很好的效果、免疫原性和可接受的安全性,异源加强针更为有效,这有助于做出适当的公共卫生决策,减少公众对疫苗接种的犹豫。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/b88b/9517782/b0078bc56536/ijerph-19-10752-g002a.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