Development and implementation of a potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaccine clinical trials.

Authors: Sathian, B., van Teijlingen, E.R. et al.

Journal: Nepal J Epidemiol

Volume: 11

Issue: 1

Pages: 959-982

ISSN: 2091-0800

DOI: 10.3126/nje.v11i1.36163

Abstract:

BACKGROUND: To date, there is no comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the suitability of COVID-19 vaccines for mass immunization. The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of novel COVID-19 vaccine candidates under clinical trial evaluation and present a contemporary update on the development and implementation of a potential vaccines. METHODS: For this study PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were used to search for eligible studies on the interface between novel coronavirus and vaccine design until December 31, 2020. RESULTS: We have included fourteen non-randomized and randomized controlled phase I-III trials. Implementation of a universal vaccination program with proven safety and efficacy through robust clinical evaluation is the long-term goal for preventing COVID-19. The immunization program must be cost-effective for mass production and accessibility. Despite pioneering techniques for the fast-track development of the vaccine in the current global emergency, mass production and availability of an effective COVID-19 vaccine could take some more time. CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest a revisiting of the reported solicited and unsolicited systemic adverse events for COVID-19 candidate vaccines. Hence, it is alarming to judiciously expose thousands of participants to COVID-19 candidate vaccines at Phase-3 trials that have adverse events and insufficient evidence on safety and effectiveness that necessitates further justification.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/35356/

Source: PubMed

Development and implementation of a potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaccine clinical trials

Authors: Sathian, B., van Teijlingen, E.R. et al.

Journal: NEPAL JOURNAL OF EPIDEMIOLOGY

Volume: 11

Issue: 1

Pages: 959-982

ISSN: 2091-0800

DOI: 10.3126/nje.v11i1.36163

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/35356/

Source: Web of Science (Lite)

Development and implementation of a potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaccine clinical trials.

Authors: Sathian, B., van Teijlingen, E. et al.

Journal: Nepal Journal of Epidemiology

Volume: 11

Issue: 1

Pages: 959-982

Publisher: International Nepal Epidemiological Association (INEA)

ISSN: 2091-0800

DOI: 10.3126/nje.v11i1.36163

Abstract:

Background: To date, there is no comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the suitability of COVID-19 vaccines for mass immunization. The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of novel COVID-19 vaccine candidates under clinical trial evaluation and present a contemporary update on the development and implementation of a potential vaccines.

Methods: For this study PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were used to search for eligible studies on the interface between novel coronavirus and vaccine design until December 31, 2020.

Results: We have included fourteen non-randomized and randomized controlled phase I-III trials. Implementation of a universal vaccination program with proven safety and efficacy through robust clinical evaluation is the long-term goal for preventing COVID-19. The immunization program must be cost-effective for mass production and accessibility. Despite pioneering techniques for the fast-track development of the vaccine in the current global emergency, mass production and availability of an effective COVID-19 vaccine could take some more time.

Conclusion: Our findings suggest a revisiting of the reported solicited and unsolicited systemic adverse events for COVID-19 candidate vaccines. Hence, it is alarming to judiciously expose thousands of participants to COVID-19 candidate vaccines at Phase-3 trials that have adverse events and insufficient evidence on safety and effectiveness that necessitates further justification.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/35356/

https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/36163

Source: Manual

Development and implementation of a potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaccine clinical trials.

Authors: Sathian, B., van Teijlingen, E.R. et al.

Journal: Nepal journal of epidemiology

Volume: 11

Issue: 1

Pages: 959-982

eISSN: 2091-0800

ISSN: 2091-0800

DOI: 10.3126/nje.v11i1.36163

Abstract:

Background

To date, there is no comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the suitability of COVID-19 vaccines for mass immunization. The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of novel COVID-19 vaccine candidates under clinical trial evaluation and present a contemporary update on the development and implementation of a potential vaccines.

Methods

For this study PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were used to search for eligible studies on the interface between novel coronavirus and vaccine design until December 31, 2020.

Results

We have included fourteen non-randomized and randomized controlled phase I-III trials. Implementation of a universal vaccination program with proven safety and efficacy through robust clinical evaluation is the long-term goal for preventing COVID-19. The immunization program must be cost-effective for mass production and accessibility. Despite pioneering techniques for the fast-track development of the vaccine in the current global emergency, mass production and availability of an effective COVID-19 vaccine could take some more time.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest a revisiting of the reported solicited and unsolicited systemic adverse events for COVID-19 candidate vaccines. Hence, it is alarming to judiciously expose thousands of participants to COVID-19 candidate vaccines at Phase-3 trials that have adverse events and insufficient evidence on safety and effectiveness that necessitates further justification.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/35356/

Source: Europe PubMed Central

Development and implementation of a potential coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaccine clinical trials.

Authors: Sathian, B., van Teijlingen, E. et al.

Journal: Nepal Journal of Epidemiology

Volume: 11

Issue: 1

Pages: 959-982

ISSN: 2091-0800

Abstract:

Background: To date, there is no comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the suitability of COVID-19 vaccines for mass immunization. The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of novel COVID-19 vaccine candidates under clinical trial evaluation and present a contemporary update on the development and implementation of a potential vaccines. Methods: For this study PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were used to search for eligible studies on the interface between novel coronavirus and vaccine design until December 31, 2020. Results: We have included fourteen non-randomized and randomized controlled phase I-III trials. Implementation of a universal vaccination program with proven safety and efficacy through robust clinical evaluation is the long-term goal for preventing COVID-19. The immunization program must be cost-effective for mass production and accessibility. Despite pioneering techniques for the fast-track development of the vaccine in the current global emergency, mass production and availability of an effective COVID-19 vaccine could take some more time. Conclusion: Our findings suggest a revisiting of the reported solicited and unsolicited systemic adverse events for COVID-19 candidate vaccines. Hence, it is alarming to judiciously expose thousands of participants to COVID-19 candidate vaccines at Phase-3 trials that have adverse events and insufficient evidence on safety and effectiveness that necessitates further justification.

http://eprints.bournemouth.ac.uk/35356/

https://www.nepjol.info/index.php/NJE/article/view/36163

Source: BURO EPrints