Safety and Tolerability of V114 Pneumococcal Vaccine in Infants: A Phase 3 Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Disease caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality in children. Pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) are well tolerated and effective at reducing pneumococcal disease caused by vaccine serotypes. VAXNEUVANCE (V114) is a 15-valent PCV containing 13 serotypes in Prevnar 13 (PCV13), plus serotypes 22F and 33F. This large phase 3 study evaluated safety and tolerability of V114 in infants. METHODS: In total, 2409 infants were randomized to receive V114 or PCV13 at 2, 4, 6, and 12 to 15 months of age. Safety was evaluated as the proportion of participants with adverse events (AEs). Solicited and unsolicited injection-site and systemic AEs were collected for 14 days after each study vaccination, and serious AEs up to 6 months after the last PCV dose. RESULTS: The proportions of participants with injection-site, systemic, vaccine-related, and serious AEs were generally comparable between recipients of V114 and PCV13. The most frequently reported AEs were solicited, with irritability and somnolence being the most frequent in both groups. Although the incidence of some AEs was higher in the V114 group, the between-group differences were small. The majority of experienced AEs were of mild-to-moderate intensity and lasted ≤3 days. There were 2 vaccine-related serious AEs of pyrexia in the V114 group, and 2 nonvaccine-related deaths, 1 in each group. No participant discontinued study vaccine because of AEs. CONCLUSIONS: V114 is well tolerated and has a generally comparable safety profile to that of PCV13. These study results support routine use of V114 in infants.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".