Comparative systematic review and meta-analysis of reactogenicity, immunogenicity and efficacy of vaccines against SARS-CoV-2
File(s)
Supporting information
Published version
Author(s)
McDonald, Ian
Murray, Sam
Reynolds, Catherine
Altmann, Daniel
Boyton, Rosemary
Type
Journal Article
Abstract
As SARS-CoV-2 vaccines are deployed worldwide, a comparative evaluation is important to underpin decision-making. We here report a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of Phase I/II/III human trials and non-human primates (NHP) studies, comparing reactogenicity, immunogenicity and efficacy across different vaccine platforms for comparative evaluation (updated to March 22, 2021). Twenty-three NHP and 32 human studies are included. Vaccines result in mostly mild, self-limiting adverse events. Highest spike neutralizing antibody (nAb) responses are identified for the mRNA-1273-SARS-CoV and adjuvanted NVX-CoV2373-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. ChAdOx-SARS-CoV-2 produces the highest T cell ELISpot responses. Pre-existing nAb against vaccine viral vector are identified following AdH-5-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination, halving immunogenicity. The mRNA vaccines depend on boosting to achieve optimal immunogenicity especially in the elderly. BNT162b2, and mRNA-1273 achieve >94%, rAd26/5 > 91% and ChAdOx-SARS-CoV-2 > 66.7% efficacy. Across different vaccine platforms there are trade-offs between antibody binding, functional nAb titers, T cell frequency, reactogenicity and efficacy. Emergence of variants makes rapid mass rollout of high efficacy vaccines essential to reduce any selective advantage.
Date Issued
2021-05-13
Date Acceptance
2021-04-15
Citation
npj Vaccines, 2021, 6
ISSN
2059-0105
Publisher
Nature Research
Journal / Book Title
npj Vaccines
Volume
6
Copyright Statement
This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
License URL
Sponsor
Medical Research Council (MRC)
Medical Research Council (MRC)
UKRI
Grant Number
MR/S019553/1
MR/V036939/1
UOB162663
Publication Status
Published
Article Number
ARTN 74