type b. A recent publication showed that after primary immunization with these vaccines, the odds ratios of adverse reactions (ARs) were significantly lower for DT3aP-HBV-IPV/Hib than for DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib. Our aim is to understand the impact of the various reactogenicity profiles at country level by comparing the ARs induced by one dose of DT3aP-HBV-IPV/Hib versus DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib in the primary infant immunization course. A mathematical projection tool was developed to simulate vaccination of infants with both vaccines in six countries: Austria, the Czech Republic, France, Jordan, Spain, and the Netherlands. Proportions of three local and five systemic ARs of interest for both vaccines were based on findings from a previous meta-analysis of ARs in infants. The absolute risk reductions calculated ranged from 3.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.8%-3.2%) for "Swelling at the injection site, any grade" to 10.0% (95% CI: 9.5%-10.5%) for "Fever, any grade." The difference in occurrence of the AR "Fever, any grade" between vaccines in 2020 ranged from over 7,000 in Austria to over 62,000 in France. Over 5 years, this would amount to a reduction of over 150,000 ARs in Austria and over 1.4 million ARs in France when using DT3aP-HBV-IPV/Hib instead of DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib. In conclusion, the estimated numbers of ARs following hexavalent vaccination in six countries showed that vaccination of infants with DT3aP-HBV-IPV/Hib could lead to fewer ARs than vaccination with DT2aP-HBV-IPV-Hib.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
George et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: