Efficacy of Palivizumab Immunoprophylaxis for Reducing Severe RSV Outcomes in Children with Immunodeficiencies: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Palivizumab is recommended for prevention of severe respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) disease in immunocompromised children, despite a lack of strong supporting evidence. The recent approval of substitute RSV-neutralizing monoclonal antibodies against RSV, offers an opportunity to synthesize the most current evidence supporting the palivizumab standard of care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of palivizumab in preventing acute respiratory tract infection- or RSV-related hospitalization, or mortality in immunocompromised children. METHODS: We searched Ovid MEDLINE and EMBASE for published clinical studies that investigated outcomes of palivizumab use in children. We included clinical trials, cohort studies, and case-control studies. The primary outcomes were RSV-related or respiratory viral infection-related hospitalizations, or RSV-related mortality. This systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (ID CRD42021248619) and is reported in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: From the 1993 records, six studies were eligible and included, for a total of 625 immunocompromised children with an heterogeneous composition of primary and acquired immunodeficiencies enrolled from palivizumab programs. There were no intervention studies. None of the studies included a control group. RSV hospitalizations were infrequent (0%-3.1% of children). Most children included received palivizumab, although one study (n = 56) did not specify how many received palivizumab. RSV mortality was neither observed, in three studies, nor reported, in three other studies. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence supporting the use of palivizumab for prevention of severe RSV disease in immunocompromised children remains extremely limited and appears insufficient to justify prioritizing this intervention as the current standard of care over alternative interventions.
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 | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".