A practitioner’s guide to the recombinant zoster vaccine: review of national vaccination recommendations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adjuvanted recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) is currently licensed in over 30 countries for the prevention of herpes zoster (HZ) in adults aged ≥50 years. We conducted a review of available national guidelines or recommendations on RZV use to identify the similarities and differences and highlight any potential gaps. National recommendations from ten countries (Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, the UK and the USA) are summarized under the following seven topics: HZ vaccine preference, age group recommendations, considerations prior to vaccination, dose schedule, co-administration with other vaccines, vaccination of special populations, and vaccine safety profile. In seven of these countries, RZV is the preferred or the only recommended HZ vaccine. There were some differences in age group recommendations, reflecting evaluations dependent on public funding. There were also differences with respect to use in immunocompromised and other special populations. The high efficacy and anticipated public health impact of RZV led to expanded national recommendations for RZV vaccination compared to previous HZ recommendation in many countries. Possible areas that could be considered in future revisions of national recommendations, including use in immunocompromised adults ≥18 years, are also highlighted. The varicella-zoster virus causes chickenpox, usually in childhood. After the chickenpox episode, the virus remains in the body in a latent state and can reactivate later in life, causing herpes zoster, or shingles. Adults over 50 years of age or those who have a weakened immune system are more vulnerable to developing herpes zoster. Herpes zoster appears as a painful localized skin rash. While live attenuated vaccines against herpes zoster have existed for many years, a recombinant vaccine against herpes zoster (RZV) has recently become available in several countries. Guidelines issued by national health authorities or vaccination committees provide healthcare professionals with information on practical aspects of vaccination. However, given the novelty of the RZV vaccine, we identified such guidelines in only ten countries (Austria, Canada, the Czech Republic, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America). We summarized these national RZV recommendations, focusing on herpes zoster vaccine preference, the age at which RZV is recommended, considerations before vaccination, vaccination schedule, the possibility of administering RZV together with other vaccines, vaccinating vulnerable populations and the safety of RZV. While national recommendations varied, most guidelines indicate that RZV is the preferred herpes zoster vaccine due to its high and persistent efficacy and as it can be administered to vulnerable populations who are at increased risk of herpes zoster and its complications. Recommendations have noted that side effects are common with RZV, however, most are of mild-moderate intensity and temporary (see also Figure 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 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 | 0.006 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.016 |
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".