The safety and immunogenicity of vaccines administered to pregnant women living with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV)-exposed uninfected (HEU) infants have a higher burden of infectious diseases related morbidity and mortality compared with HIV-unexposed uninfected (HUU). Immunization of pregnant women living with HIV (PWLWH) could reduce the severity and burden of infectious diseases for HEU in early infancy. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of safety and immunogenicity of vaccines administered to PWLWH and meta-analyses to test the overall effect of immunogenicity comparing pregnant women without HIV (PWWH) to PWLWH. We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Virtual Health Library and Cochrane databases in accordance with PRISMA guidelines for randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Review articles, case series, conference abstracts, and animal studies were excluded. Studies were included from inception to 6th September 2023, with no language restrictions. Random effects meta-analyses were performed for immunogenicity using Review manager (RevMan) analysis software version 5.4.1, Geometric Mean Titer (GMT) values were transformed to obtain the mean and standard deviation within RevMan, the effect size was computed and reported as mean difference with respective 95% confidence intervals. The review was registered with PROSPERO CRD42021289081. Findings: (GBS) vaccine. Five studies described safety outcomes, and no increase in adverse events was reported in PWLWH compared to PWWH. The GMT increase from baseline to 28-35 weeks post vaccination in HA units ranged from 12.4 (95% CI: 9.84-14.9) to 238.8 (95% CI: 0.35-477.9). Meta-analyses of influenza vaccines showed the pooled geometric mean difference in Hemagglutination Inhibition (HAI) titers post vaccination was 56.01 (95% CI: 45.01-67.01), p < 0.001. The increase was less in PWLWH when compared with PWWH: -141.76 (95% CI: -194.96, -88.55), p < 0.001. Interpretation: There are limited data on the safety and immunogenicity of vaccines given to PWLWH making policy consideration in this group difficult when new vaccines are introduced. With new vaccines on the horizon, PWLWH need to be included in studies to promote vaccine confidence for this special population. Funding: This work was funded by Medical Research Council Joint Clinical Trials Round 9 [MR/T004983/1].
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 | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".