MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2938597536 · doi:10.1016/j.vaccine.2019.04.014

The comparative efficacy and safety of herpes zoster vaccines: A network meta-analysis

2019· review· en· W2938597536 on OpenAlexaff
Ashleigh McGirr, Robyn Widenmaier, Desmond Curran, Emmanuelle Espié, Tomáš Mrkvan, Lidia Oostvogels, Benedetto Simone, Janet E. McElhaney, Heather Burnett, Katrin Haeussler, Adriana Thano, Xuan Wang, Rachel S. Newson

Bibliographic record

VenueVaccine · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsTransCanada (Canada)Health Sciences NorthGlaxoSmithKline (Canada)
FundersSanofi PasteurMerck Sharp and DohmeGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsReactogenicityMedicineVaccine efficacyPostherpetic neuralgiaAdverse effectConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisInternal medicineIncidence (geometry)PlaceboVaccinationImmunologyAnesthesiaImmunizationNeuropathic pain

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background We estimated the relative efficacy and safety of vaccines for prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) using network meta-analysis (NMA) based on evidence from randomized controlled trials. Methods A systematic literature review evaluated two different HZ vaccines: adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) and zoster vaccine live (ZVL), with different formulations assessed. Detailed feasibility assessment indicated that a NMA was feasible for efficacy (incidence of HZ and postherpetic neuralgia [PHN]) and safety (serious adverse events [SAE] and reactogenicity [injection-site reactions, systemic reaction]) outcomes. Primary analyses included frequentist NMAs with fixed effects for efficacy outcomes, due to limited data availability, and both fixed and random effects for safety and reactogenicity outcomes. As age is a known effect modifier of vaccine efficacy (VE), VE analyses were stratified by age. Results RZV demonstrated significantly higher HZ efficacy than ZVL in adults ≥60 years of age (YOA) (VE RZV = 0.92 (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 0.88, 0.94), VE ZVL = 0.51 (95%CI: 0.44, 0.57)) and adults ≥70 YOA (VE RZV = 0.91 (95%CI: 0.87, 0.94), VE ZVL = 0.37 (95%CI: 0.25, 0.48)). Similarly, RZV demonstrated significantly higher PHN efficacy than ZVL in adults ≥60 YOA (VE RZV = 0.89 (95%CI: 0.70, 0.96), VE ZVL = 0.66 (95%CI: 0.48, 0.78)) and adults ≥70 YOA (VE RZV = 0.89 (95%CI: 0.69, 0.96), VE ZVL = 0.67 (95%CI: 0.44, 0.80)). RZV was associated with significantly more injection-site and systemic reactions compared to most formulations of ZVL and placebo, however definitions and data collection procedures differed across the included studies. There were no statistically significant differences found between RZV and any formulation of ZVL or placebo for SAEs. Conclusion RZV is significantly more effective in reducing HZ and PHN incidence in adults ≥60 YOA, compared with ZVL. As anticipated with an adjuvanted vaccine, RZV results in more reactogenicity following immunization. No differences in SAEs were found between RZV and ZVL.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.042
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.073
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.225

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0420.073
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.051
Bibliometrics0.0070.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.177
GPT teacher head0.406
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations53
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVaccineSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207