Cargando…

Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Microarray patches (MAPs) deliver vaccines to the epidermis and the upper dermis, where abundant immune cells reside. There are several potential benefits to using MAPs, including reduced sharps risk, thermostability, no need for reconstitution, tolerability and self-administration. We a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Berger, Matthew N, Mowbray, Ellen S, Farag, Marian W A, Mathieu, Erin, Davies, Cristyn, Thomas, Claire, Booy, Robert, Forster, Angus H, Skinner, S Rachel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10583062/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37827725
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012247
_version_ 1785122475077533696
author Berger, Matthew N
Mowbray, Ellen S
Farag, Marian W A
Mathieu, Erin
Davies, Cristyn
Thomas, Claire
Booy, Robert
Forster, Angus H
Skinner, S Rachel
author_facet Berger, Matthew N
Mowbray, Ellen S
Farag, Marian W A
Mathieu, Erin
Davies, Cristyn
Thomas, Claire
Booy, Robert
Forster, Angus H
Skinner, S Rachel
author_sort Berger, Matthew N
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Microarray patches (MAPs) deliver vaccines to the epidermis and the upper dermis, where abundant immune cells reside. There are several potential benefits to using MAPs, including reduced sharps risk, thermostability, no need for reconstitution, tolerability and self-administration. We aimed to explore and evaluate the immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of MAPs for vaccination. METHODS: We searched CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science from inception to January 2023. Eligibility criteria included all research studies in any language, which examined microarrays or microneedles intended or used for vaccination and explored immunogenicity, safety, usability or acceptability in their findings. Two reviewers conducted title and abstract screening, full-text reviewing and data extraction. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included (quantitative=15, qualitative=2 and mixed methods=5). The risk of bias was mostly low, with two studies at high risk of bias. Four clinical trials were included, three using influenza antigens and one with Japanese encephalitis delivered by MAP. A meta-analysis indicated similar or higher immunogenicity in influenza MAPs compared with needle and syringe (N&S) (standardised mean difference=10.80, 95% CI: 3.51 to 18.08, p<0.00001). There were no significant differences in immune cell function between MAPs and N&S. No serious adverse events were reported in MAPs. Erythema was more common after MAP application than N&S but was brief and well tolerated. Lower pain scores were usually reported after MAP application than N&S. Most studies found MAPs easy to use and highly acceptable among healthcare professionals, laypeople and parents. CONCLUSION: MAPs for vaccination were safe and well tolerated and evoked similar or enhanced immunogenicity than N&S, but further research is needed. Vaccine uptake may be increased using MAPs due to less pain, enhanced thermostability, layperson and self-administration. MAPs could benefit at-risk groups and low and middle-income countries. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022323026.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10583062
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-105830622023-10-19 Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis Berger, Matthew N Mowbray, Ellen S Farag, Marian W A Mathieu, Erin Davies, Cristyn Thomas, Claire Booy, Robert Forster, Angus H Skinner, S Rachel BMJ Glob Health Original Research BACKGROUND: Microarray patches (MAPs) deliver vaccines to the epidermis and the upper dermis, where abundant immune cells reside. There are several potential benefits to using MAPs, including reduced sharps risk, thermostability, no need for reconstitution, tolerability and self-administration. We aimed to explore and evaluate the immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of MAPs for vaccination. METHODS: We searched CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE and Web of Science from inception to January 2023. Eligibility criteria included all research studies in any language, which examined microarrays or microneedles intended or used for vaccination and explored immunogenicity, safety, usability or acceptability in their findings. Two reviewers conducted title and abstract screening, full-text reviewing and data extraction. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included (quantitative=15, qualitative=2 and mixed methods=5). The risk of bias was mostly low, with two studies at high risk of bias. Four clinical trials were included, three using influenza antigens and one with Japanese encephalitis delivered by MAP. A meta-analysis indicated similar or higher immunogenicity in influenza MAPs compared with needle and syringe (N&S) (standardised mean difference=10.80, 95% CI: 3.51 to 18.08, p<0.00001). There were no significant differences in immune cell function between MAPs and N&S. No serious adverse events were reported in MAPs. Erythema was more common after MAP application than N&S but was brief and well tolerated. Lower pain scores were usually reported after MAP application than N&S. Most studies found MAPs easy to use and highly acceptable among healthcare professionals, laypeople and parents. CONCLUSION: MAPs for vaccination were safe and well tolerated and evoked similar or enhanced immunogenicity than N&S, but further research is needed. Vaccine uptake may be increased using MAPs due to less pain, enhanced thermostability, layperson and self-administration. MAPs could benefit at-risk groups and low and middle-income countries. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022323026. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-10-12 /pmc/articles/PMC10583062/ /pubmed/37827725 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012247 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Original Research
Berger, Matthew N
Mowbray, Ellen S
Farag, Marian W A
Mathieu, Erin
Davies, Cristyn
Thomas, Claire
Booy, Robert
Forster, Angus H
Skinner, S Rachel
Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort immunogenicity, safety, usability and acceptability of microarray patches for vaccination: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10583062/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37827725
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012247
work_keys_str_mv AT bergermatthewn immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mowbrayellens immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT faragmarianwa immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT mathieuerin immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT daviescristyn immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT thomasclaire immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT booyrobert immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT forsterangush immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT skinnersrachel immunogenicitysafetyusabilityandacceptabilityofmicroarraypatchesforvaccinationasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis