经批准的针对SARS-CoV-2及其变体的疫苗III期临床试验疫苗疗效的荟萃分析

IF 3 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES
Dipesh Dhayfule, Yu-Heng Wu, Akram Ashyani, Ming-Chi Li, Chin-Shiang Tsai, Po-Lin Chen, Torbjörn E M Nordling
{"title":"经批准的针对SARS-CoV-2及其变体的疫苗III期临床试验疫苗疗效的荟萃分析","authors":"Dipesh Dhayfule, Yu-Heng Wu, Akram Ashyani, Ming-Chi Li, Chin-Shiang Tsai, Po-Lin Chen, Torbjörn E M Nordling","doi":"10.1186/s12879-025-11289-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic and transition to a post-pandemic era, it is crucial to reflect on our experiences and prepare for future pandemics. Here we evaluate the impact of different methods for calculating the vaccine efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, which has not been done previously.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis of 38 approved COVID-19 vaccines using data from phase III clinical trials between May 4, 2020, and June 10, 2022. We analyze vaccine efficacy against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants including the original strain, Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Kappa using multiple endpoints. Clinical endpoints are categorized into a tree structure including asymptomatic infection, symptomatic infection, mild to critical illness, and death. We employ re-estimated vaccine efficacies, including relative risk and Poisson regression with robust error variance, for equitable cross-vaccine comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We re-estimated 63 vaccine efficacies, revealing a 3% to 6% difference in five efficacies compared to the original study. Four efficacies exhibited lower bounds below the critical 50% threshold for the endpoint asymptomatic, symptomatic, moderate, and severe, contrary to the initial reports. However, efficacy consistently surpasses the 50% threshold against symptomatic COVID-19. Overall efficacies range from 34.2% to 100%, 50.3% to 100% against symptomatic, and 66.8% to 100% against severe, and 65% to 95% against variants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our systematic classification of vaccine endpoints enables more statistically rigorous meta-analyses across studies. Beyond the quantitative results, our study emphasizes the need to standardize the estimation method for robust assessments of vaccine efficacy. We highlight the incompleteness of the knowledge about different vaccine efficacy in the middle of the pandemic, in particular the need to identify variants during the trials and report on multiple endpoints. We encourage all authors to publicly share their data, fostering additional impartial investigations. This data collection enables comparisons with real-world effectiveness data, enabling future studies of the predictive power of efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":8981,"journal":{"name":"BMC Infectious Diseases","volume":"25 1","pages":"1169"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12465431/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A meta-analysis of vaccine efficacy from phase III clinical trials of approved vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and variants.\",\"authors\":\"Dipesh Dhayfule, Yu-Heng Wu, Akram Ashyani, Ming-Chi Li, Chin-Shiang Tsai, Po-Lin Chen, Torbjörn E M Nordling\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12879-025-11289-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>As we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic and transition to a post-pandemic era, it is crucial to reflect on our experiences and prepare for future pandemics. Here we evaluate the impact of different methods for calculating the vaccine efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, which has not been done previously.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a meta-analysis of 38 approved COVID-19 vaccines using data from phase III clinical trials between May 4, 2020, and June 10, 2022. We analyze vaccine efficacy against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants including the original strain, Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Kappa using multiple endpoints. Clinical endpoints are categorized into a tree structure including asymptomatic infection, symptomatic infection, mild to critical illness, and death. We employ re-estimated vaccine efficacies, including relative risk and Poisson regression with robust error variance, for equitable cross-vaccine comparisons.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We re-estimated 63 vaccine efficacies, revealing a 3% to 6% difference in five efficacies compared to the original study. Four efficacies exhibited lower bounds below the critical 50% threshold for the endpoint asymptomatic, symptomatic, moderate, and severe, contrary to the initial reports. However, efficacy consistently surpasses the 50% threshold against symptomatic COVID-19. Overall efficacies range from 34.2% to 100%, 50.3% to 100% against symptomatic, and 66.8% to 100% against severe, and 65% to 95% against variants.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our systematic classification of vaccine endpoints enables more statistically rigorous meta-analyses across studies. Beyond the quantitative results, our study emphasizes the need to standardize the estimation method for robust assessments of vaccine efficacy. We highlight the incompleteness of the knowledge about different vaccine efficacy in the middle of the pandemic, in particular the need to identify variants during the trials and report on multiple endpoints. We encourage all authors to publicly share their data, fostering additional impartial investigations. This data collection enables comparisons with real-world effectiveness data, enabling future studies of the predictive power of efficacy.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":8981,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Infectious Diseases\",\"volume\":\"25 1\",\"pages\":\"1169\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12465431/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Infectious Diseases\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-025-11289-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Infectious Diseases","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-025-11289-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着我们走出COVID-19大流行并向大流行后时代过渡,反思我们的经验并为未来的大流行做好准备至关重要。在此,我们评估了不同方法计算COVID-19疫苗效力的影响,这是以前没有做过的。方法:利用2020年5月4日至2022年6月10日期间III期临床试验的数据,对38种已批准的COVID-19疫苗进行了荟萃分析。我们使用多个终点分析了疫苗对多种SARS-CoV-2变体的疗效,包括原始菌株、Alpha、Beta、Delta和Kappa。临床终点分为树状结构,包括无症状感染、有症状感染、轻危疾病和死亡。我们采用重新估计的疫苗有效性,包括相对风险和具有稳健误差方差的泊松回归,进行公平的跨疫苗比较。结果:我们重新估计了63种疫苗的效力,与最初的研究相比,其中5种效力的差异为3%至6%。与最初的报道相反,无症状、有症状、中度和重度的4种疗效表现出低于50%临界阈值的下界。然而,对有症状的COVID-19的疗效始终超过50%的阈值。总体有效率为34.2%至100%,对症状型为50.3%至100%,对重症为66.8%至100%,对变种为65%至95%。结论:我们对疫苗终点的系统分类使得跨研究的荟萃分析在统计上更加严谨。除了定量结果,我们的研究强调需要标准化的估计方法,以可靠地评估疫苗效力。我们强调,在大流行中期,关于不同疫苗效力的知识是不完整的,特别是需要在试验期间识别变异并报告多个终点。我们鼓励所有作者公开分享他们的数据,促进更多的公正调查。该数据收集可以与现实世界的有效性数据进行比较,从而使未来的有效性预测能力研究成为可能。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A meta-analysis of vaccine efficacy from phase III clinical trials of approved vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 and variants.

Background: As we emerge from the COVID-19 pandemic and transition to a post-pandemic era, it is crucial to reflect on our experiences and prepare for future pandemics. Here we evaluate the impact of different methods for calculating the vaccine efficacy of COVID-19 vaccines, which has not been done previously.

Methods: We conducted a meta-analysis of 38 approved COVID-19 vaccines using data from phase III clinical trials between May 4, 2020, and June 10, 2022. We analyze vaccine efficacy against multiple SARS-CoV-2 variants including the original strain, Alpha, Beta, Delta, and Kappa using multiple endpoints. Clinical endpoints are categorized into a tree structure including asymptomatic infection, symptomatic infection, mild to critical illness, and death. We employ re-estimated vaccine efficacies, including relative risk and Poisson regression with robust error variance, for equitable cross-vaccine comparisons.

Results: We re-estimated 63 vaccine efficacies, revealing a 3% to 6% difference in five efficacies compared to the original study. Four efficacies exhibited lower bounds below the critical 50% threshold for the endpoint asymptomatic, symptomatic, moderate, and severe, contrary to the initial reports. However, efficacy consistently surpasses the 50% threshold against symptomatic COVID-19. Overall efficacies range from 34.2% to 100%, 50.3% to 100% against symptomatic, and 66.8% to 100% against severe, and 65% to 95% against variants.

Conclusions: Our systematic classification of vaccine endpoints enables more statistically rigorous meta-analyses across studies. Beyond the quantitative results, our study emphasizes the need to standardize the estimation method for robust assessments of vaccine efficacy. We highlight the incompleteness of the knowledge about different vaccine efficacy in the middle of the pandemic, in particular the need to identify variants during the trials and report on multiple endpoints. We encourage all authors to publicly share their data, fostering additional impartial investigations. This data collection enables comparisons with real-world effectiveness data, enabling future studies of the predictive power of efficacy.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
BMC Infectious Diseases
BMC Infectious Diseases 医学-传染病学
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
860
审稿时长
3.3 months
期刊介绍: BMC Infectious Diseases is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of the prevention, diagnosis and management of infectious and sexually transmitted diseases in humans, as well as related molecular genetics, pathophysiology, and epidemiology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信