The comparative efficacy and safety of herpes zoster vaccines: A network meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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: = 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".