Cargando…

Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

INTRODUCTION: Maternal vaccination is a promising strategy to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases for mothers and infants. We aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of the efficacy and safety of all available maternal vaccines. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and Clinical...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Bruin, Odette, Phijffer, Emily, Ahmadizar, Fariba, van der Maas, Nicoline, Wildenbeest, Joanne, Sturkenboom, Miriam, Bont, Louis, Bloemenkamp, Kitty
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10619060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37899087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012376
_version_ 1785129906595692544
author de Bruin, Odette
Phijffer, Emily
Ahmadizar, Fariba
van der Maas, Nicoline
Wildenbeest, Joanne
Sturkenboom, Miriam
Bont, Louis
Bloemenkamp, Kitty
author_facet de Bruin, Odette
Phijffer, Emily
Ahmadizar, Fariba
van der Maas, Nicoline
Wildenbeest, Joanne
Sturkenboom, Miriam
Bont, Louis
Bloemenkamp, Kitty
author_sort de Bruin, Odette
collection PubMed
description INTRODUCTION: Maternal vaccination is a promising strategy to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases for mothers and infants. We aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of the efficacy and safety of all available maternal vaccines. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov on 1 February 2022, for phase III and IV randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared maternal vaccination against any pathogen with placebo or no vaccination. Primary outcomes were laboratory-confirmed or clinically confirmed disease in mothers and infants. Secondary safety outcomes included intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, maternal death, preterm birth, congenital malformations and infant death. Random effects meta-analysis were used to calculate pooled risk ratio’s (RR). Quality appraisal was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Six RCTs on four maternal vaccines, influenza, tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap), pneumococcal and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were eligible. The overall risk of bias and certainty of evidence varied from low to high. Maternal influenza vaccination significantly reduced the number of laboratory-confirmed influenza cases (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.79, event rate 57 vs 98, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I(2)=0%), and clinically confirmed influenza cases in mothers (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99, event rate 418 vs 472, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I(2)=0%), and laboratory-confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.85, event rate 98 vs 148, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I(2)=0%), although this was not significant for clinically confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05, event rate 1371 vs 1378, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I(2)=0%). No efficacy data were available on maternal Tdap vaccination. Maternal pneumococcal vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed and clinically confirmed middle ear disease (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.02, event rate 9 vs 18, 1 RCT, n=133 and RR 0.88 95% CI 0.69 to 1.12, event rate 42 vs 47, 1 RCT, n=133, respectively), and clinically confirmed lower-respiratory tract infection (LRTI) (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43, event rate 18 vs 34, 1 RCT, n=70) in infants. Maternal RSV vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed RSV LRTI in infants (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.01, event rate 103 vs 71, 1 RCT, n=4527). There was no evidence of a significant effect of any of the maternal vaccines on the reported safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The few RCTs with low event rates suggest that, depending on the type of maternal vaccine, the vaccine might effectively prevent disease and within its size does not show safety concerns in mothers and infants. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021235115.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10619060
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106190602023-11-02 Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials de Bruin, Odette Phijffer, Emily Ahmadizar, Fariba van der Maas, Nicoline Wildenbeest, Joanne Sturkenboom, Miriam Bont, Louis Bloemenkamp, Kitty BMJ Glob Health Original Research INTRODUCTION: Maternal vaccination is a promising strategy to reduce the burden of vaccine-preventable diseases for mothers and infants. We aimed to provide an up-to-date overview of the efficacy and safety of all available maternal vaccines. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL and ClinicalTrials.gov on 1 February 2022, for phase III and IV randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared maternal vaccination against any pathogen with placebo or no vaccination. Primary outcomes were laboratory-confirmed or clinically confirmed disease in mothers and infants. Secondary safety outcomes included intrauterine growth restriction, stillbirth, maternal death, preterm birth, congenital malformations and infant death. Random effects meta-analysis were used to calculate pooled risk ratio’s (RR). Quality appraisal was performed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). RESULTS: Six RCTs on four maternal vaccines, influenza, tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap), pneumococcal and respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) were eligible. The overall risk of bias and certainty of evidence varied from low to high. Maternal influenza vaccination significantly reduced the number of laboratory-confirmed influenza cases (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.79, event rate 57 vs 98, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I(2)=0%), and clinically confirmed influenza cases in mothers (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99, event rate 418 vs 472, 2 RCTs, n=6003, I(2)=0%), and laboratory-confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.85, event rate 98 vs 148, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I(2)=0%), although this was not significant for clinically confirmed influenza in infants (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.05, event rate 1371 vs 1378, 2 RCTs, n=5883, I(2)=0%). No efficacy data were available on maternal Tdap vaccination. Maternal pneumococcal vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed and clinically confirmed middle ear disease (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.02, event rate 9 vs 18, 1 RCT, n=133 and RR 0.88 95% CI 0.69 to 1.12, event rate 42 vs 47, 1 RCT, n=133, respectively), and clinically confirmed lower-respiratory tract infection (LRTI) (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.43, event rate 18 vs 34, 1 RCT, n=70) in infants. Maternal RSV vaccination did not reduce laboratory-confirmed RSV LRTI in infants (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.01, event rate 103 vs 71, 1 RCT, n=4527). There was no evidence of a significant effect of any of the maternal vaccines on the reported safety outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The few RCTs with low event rates suggest that, depending on the type of maternal vaccine, the vaccine might effectively prevent disease and within its size does not show safety concerns in mothers and infants. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021235115. BMJ Publishing Group 2023-10-29 /pmc/articles/PMC10619060/ /pubmed/37899087 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012376 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
de Bruin, Odette
Phijffer, Emily
Ahmadizar, Fariba
van der Maas, Nicoline
Wildenbeest, Joanne
Sturkenboom, Miriam
Bont, Louis
Bloemenkamp, Kitty
Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_full Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_fullStr Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_full_unstemmed Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_short Are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
title_sort are maternal vaccines effective and safe for mothers and infants? a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10619060/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37899087
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-012376
work_keys_str_mv AT debruinodette arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT phijfferemily arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT ahmadizarfariba arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT vandermaasnicoline arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT wildenbeestjoanne arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT sturkenboommiriam arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT bontlouis arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials
AT bloemenkampkitty arematernalvaccineseffectiveandsafeformothersandinfantsasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomisedcontrolledtrials