4.8 Review

Evaluation of the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines: a rapid review

Journal

BMC MEDICINE
Volume 19, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12916-021-02059-5

Keywords

Novel coronavirus diseases 2019; Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2; Vaccine; Safety profile; Review

Funding

  1. National Science Fund for Distinguished Young Scholars [81525023]
  2. National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) from the UK Government [16/137/109]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Meta-analysis of safety profiles of COVID-19 vaccines showed that different platforms of vaccines have different safety outcomes, with age groups of vaccine recipients also playing a role in safety profiles. Long-term population-level surveillance is needed to further define the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.
BackgroundThe rapid process of research and development and lack of follow-up time post-vaccination aroused great public concern about the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccine candidates. To provide comprehensive overview of the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines by using meta-analysis technique.MethodsEnglish-language articles and results posted on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, PMC, official regulatory websites, and post-authorization safety surveillance data were searched through June 12, 2021. Publications disclosing safety data of COVID-19 candidate vaccines in humans were included. A meta-analysis of proportions was performed to estimate the pooled incidence and the pooled rate ratio (RR) of safety outcomes of COVID-19 vaccines using different platforms.ResultsA total of 87 publications with safety data from clinical trials and post-authorization studies of 19 COVID-19 vaccines on 6 different platforms were included. The pooled rates of local and systemic reactions were significantly lower among inactivated vaccines (23.7%, 21.0%), protein subunit vaccines (33.0%, 22.3%), and DNA vaccines (39.5%, 29.3%), compared to RNA vaccines (89.4%, 83.3%), non-replicating vector vaccines (55.9%, 66.3%), and virus-like particle vaccines (100.0%, 78.9%). Solicited injection-site pain was the most common local reactions, and fatigue and headache were the most common systemic reactions. The frequency of vaccine-related serious adverse events was low (< 0.1%) and balanced between treatment groups. Vaccine platforms and age groups of vaccine recipients accounted for much of the heterogeneity in safety profiles between COVID-19 vaccines. Reporting rates of adverse events from post-authorization observational studies were similar to results from clinical trials. Crude reporting rates of adverse events from post-authorization safety monitoring (passive surveillance) were lower than in clinical trials and varied between countries.ConclusionsAvailable evidence indicates that eligible COVID-19 vaccines have an acceptable short-term safety profile. Additional studies and long-term population-level surveillance are strongly encouraged to further define the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available