Cargando…
Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis
OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in randomised clinical trials in relation to human vaccine development. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis assessing the certainty of evidence with Grading of...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9226993/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35738649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058795 |
_version_ | 1784734050971287552 |
---|---|
author | Krauss, Sara Russo Barbateskovic, Marija Klingenberg, Sarah Louise Djurisic, Snezana Petersen, Sesilje Bondo Kenfelt, Mette Kong, De Zhao Jakobsen, Janus C Gluud, Christian |
author_facet | Krauss, Sara Russo Barbateskovic, Marija Klingenberg, Sarah Louise Djurisic, Snezana Petersen, Sesilje Bondo Kenfelt, Mette Kong, De Zhao Jakobsen, Janus C Gluud, Christian |
author_sort | Krauss, Sara Russo |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in randomised clinical trials in relation to human vaccine development. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis assessing the certainty of evidence with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). DATA SOURCES: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIOSIS, Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science until 29 June 2021, and Chinese databases until September 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials irrespective of type, status and language of publication, with trial participants of any sex, age, ethnicity, diagnosis, comorbidity and country of residence. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with Cochrane’s RoB tool 1. Dichotomous data were analysed as risk ratios (RRs) and continuous data as mean differences. We explored both fixed-effect and random-effects models, with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was quantified with I(2) statistic. We GRADE assessed the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 102 randomised clinical trials (26 457 participants). Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention may have no effect on serious adverse events (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.43; very low certainty) and on all-cause mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.41; very low certainty). No trial reported on quality of life. Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention may increase adverse events (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.20; very low certainty). We found no or little evidence of a difference between aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention when assessing serology with geometric mean titres or concentrations or participants’ seroprotection. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence at very low certainty, we were unable to identify benefits of aluminium adjuvants, which may be associated with adverse events considered non-serious. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9226993 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92269932022-07-08 Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis Krauss, Sara Russo Barbateskovic, Marija Klingenberg, Sarah Louise Djurisic, Snezana Petersen, Sesilje Bondo Kenfelt, Mette Kong, De Zhao Jakobsen, Janus C Gluud, Christian BMJ Open Public Health OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in randomised clinical trials in relation to human vaccine development. DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis assessing the certainty of evidence with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). DATA SOURCES: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, LILACS, BIOSIS, Science Citation Index Expanded and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science until 29 June 2021, and Chinese databases until September 2021. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Randomised clinical trials irrespective of type, status and language of publication, with trial participants of any sex, age, ethnicity, diagnosis, comorbidity and country of residence. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias with Cochrane’s RoB tool 1. Dichotomous data were analysed as risk ratios (RRs) and continuous data as mean differences. We explored both fixed-effect and random-effects models, with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was quantified with I(2) statistic. We GRADE assessed the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 102 randomised clinical trials (26 457 participants). Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention may have no effect on serious adverse events (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.43; very low certainty) and on all-cause mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.41; very low certainty). No trial reported on quality of life. Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention may increase adverse events (RR 1.13, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.20; very low certainty). We found no or little evidence of a difference between aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention when assessing serology with geometric mean titres or concentrations or participants’ seroprotection. CONCLUSIONS: Based on evidence at very low certainty, we were unable to identify benefits of aluminium adjuvants, which may be associated with adverse events considered non-serious. BMJ Publishing Group 2022-06-22 /pmc/articles/PMC9226993/ /pubmed/35738649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058795 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2022. 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 | Public Health Krauss, Sara Russo Barbateskovic, Marija Klingenberg, Sarah Louise Djurisic, Snezana Petersen, Sesilje Bondo Kenfelt, Mette Kong, De Zhao Jakobsen, Janus C Gluud, Christian Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis |
title | Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis |
title_full | Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis |
title_fullStr | Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis |
title_short | Aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and Trial Sequential Analysis |
title_sort | aluminium adjuvants versus placebo or no intervention in vaccine randomised clinical trials: a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis |
topic | Public Health |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9226993/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35738649 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2021-058795 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT krausssararusso aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT barbateskovicmarija aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT klingenbergsarahlouise aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT djurisicsnezana aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT petersensesiljebondo aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT kenfeltmette aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT kongdezhao aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT jakobsenjanusc aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis AT gluudchristian aluminiumadjuvantsversusplaceboornointerventioninvaccinerandomisedclinicaltrialsasystematicreviewwithmetaanalysisandtrialsequentialanalysis |