MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4290949318 · doi:10.1002/uog.26050

Evaluation of immunogenicity and reactogenicity of <scp>COVID</scp>‐19 vaccines in pregnant women

2022· article· en· W4290949318 sur OpenAlexaff
Helena Blakeway, Zahin Amin‐Chowdhury, Smriti Prasad, Erkan Kalafat, Mohammed Ismail, F. N. Abdallah, Arezou Rezvani, Gayatri Amirthalingam, Kyrah K. Brown, Kirsty Le Doaré, Paul T. Heath, Shamez Ladhani, Asma Khalil

Notice bibliographique

RevueUltrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2022
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCOVID-19 Impact on Reproduction
Établissements canadiensInstitute of Infection and Immunity
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésReactogenicityMedicineVaccinationPregnancyImmunogenicityCohortVaccination scheduleImmunologyObstetricsPediatricsInternal medicineImmunizationAntibody

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection in pregnancy is associated with increased risk of adverse maternal and perinatal outcomes. Vaccines are highly effective at preventing severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but there are limited data on COVID-19 vaccines in pregnancy. This study aimed to investigate the reactogenicity and immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant women when administered according to the 12-week-interval dosing schedule recommended in the UK. METHODS: This was a cohort study of pregnant women receiving COVID-19 vaccination between April and September 2021. The outcomes were immunogenicity and reactogenicity after COVID-19 vaccination. Pregnant women were recruited by phone, e-mail and/or text and were vaccinated according to vaccine availability at their local vaccination center. For immunogenicity assessment, blood samples were taken at specific timepoints after each dose to evaluate nucleocapsid protein (N) and spike protein (S) antibody titers. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant female healthcare workers in the same age group who were vaccinated as part of the national immunization program in a contemporaneous longitudinal cohort study. Longitudinal changes in serum antibody titers and association with pregnancy status were assessed using a two-step regression approach. Reactogenicity assessment in pregnant women was undertaken using an online questionnaire. The comparator group comprised non-pregnant women aged 18-49 years who had received two vaccine doses in primary care. The association of pregnancy status with reactogenicity was assessed using logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Overall, 67 pregnant women, of whom 66 had received a mRNA vaccine, and 79 non-pregnant women, of whom 50 had received a mRNA vaccine, were included in the immunogenicity study. Most (61.2%) pregnant women received their first vaccine dose in the third trimester, while 3.0% received it in the first trimester and 35.8% in the second trimester. SARS-CoV-2 S-antibody geometric mean concentrations after mRNA vaccination were not significantly different at 2-6 weeks after the first dose but were significantly lower at 2-6 weeks after the second dose in infection-naïve pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. In pregnant women, prior infection was associated with higher antibody levels at 2-6 weeks after the second vaccine dose. Reactogenicity analysis included 108 pregnant women and 116 non-pregnant women. After the first dose, tiredness and chills were reported less commonly in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women (P = 0.043 and P = 0.029, respectively). After the second dose, feeling generally unwell was reported less commonly (P = 0.046) in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. CONCLUSIONS: Using an extended 12-week interval between vaccine doses, antibody responses after two doses of mRNA COVID-19 vaccine were found to be lower in pregnant compared with non-pregnant women. Strong antibody responses were achieved after one dose in previously infected women, regardless of pregnancy status. Pregnant women reported fewer adverse events after both the first and second dose of vaccine. These findings should now be addressed in larger controlled studies. © 2022 The Authors. Ultrasound in Obstetrics & Gynecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,168
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMétarecherche
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,165
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,839

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,168
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,034
Tête enseignante GPT0,311
Écart entre enseignants0,277 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations12
Publié2022
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUltrasound in Obstetrics and GynecologyMême sujetCOVID-19 Impact on ReproductionTravaux en français237 207