Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials demonstrates adjuvanted COVID-19 vaccines reduce mortality and maintain acceptable safety, indicating potent protection despite higher local...
Background: The benefits and risks of adjuvant-associated COVID-19 vaccines (ACVs) are unclear. The study aimed to assess the immunogenicity and safety of ACVs compared with controls (placebo or the same vaccine without adjuvants [NACVs]). Methods: Randomized controlled trials sourced from PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were systematically reviewed. Evaluators extracted information independently. The evidence quality was assessed using random-effects models. The risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Furthermore, full vaccination with ACVs significantly increased the risk of local and systemic adverse reactions (AEs) compared with controls. However, vaccination with ACVs did not significantly increase the risk of systemic and localized AEs compared with vaccination with NACVs only (P > 0.05). It was observed that ACVs had a lower risk of all-cause mortality than controls (RR, 0.51; 95 % CI 0.30-0.87). It was further found that ACVs produced nAb response against all sublines of the Omicron variant, but the antibody titers were lower than those for the SARS-CoV-2 original strain. Conclusions: The findings of this meta-analysis demonstrate that ACVs may have a superior effect and an acceptable safety in preventing COVID-19. Although these results suggest the potential of ACVs, further studies are required.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cheng et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: