MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406945113 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofae631.249

P-42. Systematic review and meta-analysis of recombinant herpes zoster vaccine in immunocompromised populations

2025· article· en· W4406945113 on OpenAlexaff
Fawziah Marra, Michael C. Yip, Jacquelyn J. Cragg, Nirma Khatri Vadlamudi

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHerpesvirus Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineVirologyMeta-analysisRecombinant DNAImmunologyInternal medicineBiologyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Herpes zoster infection is common in immunocompromised individuals. Recently, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices recommended immunizing with the recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV). Methods Objective: To evaluate the efficacy, immunogenicity and safety of RZV in immunocompromised individuals, such as transplant recipients, cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy, individuals with preexisting autoimmune diseases and HIV-infected patients. Data Sources and Study Selection: From January 1984 to October 2023, a systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and Cochrane CENTRAL was performed. Randomized clinical trials (RCT) evaluating RZV compared to placebo in immunocompromised adults were selected. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Study characteristics and estimates on the incidence of herpes zoster, humoral and cellular immune responses, and safety data were extracted from studies. Estimates were pooled using random-effects meta-analysis. Differences by study-level characteristics were estimated using subgroup meta-analysis and metaregression. Results Seven RCTs were included. Compared to placebo, RZV reduced the incidence of herpes zoster across all ages by 81% (RR: 0.19, 95%CI: 0.09, 0.44), with moderate heterogeneity across the studies (I2 = 60.49%; τ2 = 0.31; P=0.07). RZV significantly increased humoral and cellular immunity one month after the last dose. Transplant and past malignancy were associated with lower immunogenicity. RZV was more reactogenic with more local and systemic adverse events. There was no difference in serious adverse events or death between the vaccine and placebo arms. Conclusion This study suggests that RZV reduces the risk of herpes zoster infection in immunocompromised individuals. This vaccine should be routinely offered to immunocompromised individuals, preferably before chemotherapy or treatment. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.049
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.049
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0220.036
Bibliometrics0.0100.010
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.323 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicHerpesvirus Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207