Cargando…
Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
New Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are available to prevent the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. We compared the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines to prevent symptomatic and severe disease in the adult population and to prevent symptomatic...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8611039/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34815503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02321-z |
_version_ | 1784603222087827456 |
---|---|
author | Rotshild, Victoria Hirsh-Raccah, Bruria Miskin, Ian Muszkat, Mordechai Matok, Ilan |
author_facet | Rotshild, Victoria Hirsh-Raccah, Bruria Miskin, Ian Muszkat, Mordechai Matok, Ilan |
author_sort | Rotshild, Victoria |
collection | PubMed |
description | New Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are available to prevent the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. We compared the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines to prevent symptomatic and severe disease in the adult population and to prevent symptomatic COVID-19 among the elderly. Leading medical databases were searched until August 30, 2021. Published phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated efficacy of the vaccine to prevent symptomatic and sever COVID-19 in adults were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated the literature search results and independently extracted summary data. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) according to PRISMA-NMA 2015 to pool indirect comparisons between different vaccines regarding their relative efficacy. The primary outcomes were the efficacy of the vaccine against symptomatic COVID-19 in adults (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021235364). Above 200,000 adult participants from eight phase 3 RCTs were included in NMA, of whom 52% received the intervention (active COVID-19 vaccine). While each of nine vaccines was tested in the unique clinical trial as compared to control, based on indirect comparison, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were ranked with the highest probability of efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 (P-scores 0.952 and 0.843, respectively), followed by Gam-COVID-Vac (P-score 0.782), NVX-CoV23730 (P-score 0.700), CoronaVac (P-score 0.570), BN02 (P-score 0.428), WIV04 (P-score 0.327), and Ad26.COV2.S (P-score 0.198). No statistically significant difference was seen in the ability of the vaccines to prevent symptomatic disease in the elderly population. No vaccine was statistically significantly associated with a decreased risk for severe COVID-19 than other vaccines, although mRNA-1273 and Gam-COVID-Vac have the highest P-scores (0.899 and 0.816, respectively), indicating greater protection against severe disease than other vaccines. In our indirect comparison, the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, which use mRNA technology, were associated with the highest efficacy to prevent symptomatic COVID-19 compared to other vaccines. This finding may have importance when deciding which vaccine to use, together with other important factors as availability of the vaccines, costs, logistics, side effects, and patient acceptability. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8611039 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86110392021-11-26 Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis Rotshild, Victoria Hirsh-Raccah, Bruria Miskin, Ian Muszkat, Mordechai Matok, Ilan Sci Rep Article New Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines are available to prevent the ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic. We compared the efficacy of new COVID-19 vaccines to prevent symptomatic and severe disease in the adult population and to prevent symptomatic COVID-19 among the elderly. Leading medical databases were searched until August 30, 2021. Published phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluated efficacy of the vaccine to prevent symptomatic and sever COVID-19 in adults were included. Two reviewers independently evaluated the literature search results and independently extracted summary data. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. We performed a network meta-analysis (NMA) according to PRISMA-NMA 2015 to pool indirect comparisons between different vaccines regarding their relative efficacy. The primary outcomes were the efficacy of the vaccine against symptomatic COVID-19 in adults (PROSPERO registration number: CRD42021235364). Above 200,000 adult participants from eight phase 3 RCTs were included in NMA, of whom 52% received the intervention (active COVID-19 vaccine). While each of nine vaccines was tested in the unique clinical trial as compared to control, based on indirect comparison, BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines were ranked with the highest probability of efficacy against symptomatic COVID-19 (P-scores 0.952 and 0.843, respectively), followed by Gam-COVID-Vac (P-score 0.782), NVX-CoV23730 (P-score 0.700), CoronaVac (P-score 0.570), BN02 (P-score 0.428), WIV04 (P-score 0.327), and Ad26.COV2.S (P-score 0.198). No statistically significant difference was seen in the ability of the vaccines to prevent symptomatic disease in the elderly population. No vaccine was statistically significantly associated with a decreased risk for severe COVID-19 than other vaccines, although mRNA-1273 and Gam-COVID-Vac have the highest P-scores (0.899 and 0.816, respectively), indicating greater protection against severe disease than other vaccines. In our indirect comparison, the BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccines, which use mRNA technology, were associated with the highest efficacy to prevent symptomatic COVID-19 compared to other vaccines. This finding may have importance when deciding which vaccine to use, together with other important factors as availability of the vaccines, costs, logistics, side effects, and patient acceptability. Nature Publishing Group UK 2021-11-23 /pmc/articles/PMC8611039/ /pubmed/34815503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02321-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Rotshild, Victoria Hirsh-Raccah, Bruria Miskin, Ian Muszkat, Mordechai Matok, Ilan Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title | Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full | Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_short | Comparing the clinical efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_sort | comparing the clinical efficacy of covid-19 vaccines: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8611039/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34815503 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-02321-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT rotshildvictoria comparingtheclinicalefficacyofcovid19vaccinesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT hirshraccahbruria comparingtheclinicalefficacyofcovid19vaccinesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT miskinian comparingtheclinicalefficacyofcovid19vaccinesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT muszkatmordechai comparingtheclinicalefficacyofcovid19vaccinesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT matokilan comparingtheclinicalefficacyofcovid19vaccinesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis |