4.5 Review

Immunogenicity after pre- and post-exposure rabies vaccination: A systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis

期刊

VACCINE
卷 39, 期 7, 页码 1044-1050

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.01.023

关键词

Antibodies; Intradermal; Intramuscular; Seroconversion; Seropositive; Titre; Vaccine

资金

  1. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council Fellowship [APP1158469]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There are various vaccination schedules for rabies prevention and post-exposure prophylaxis, with older individuals showing lower antibody responses and 1-week vaccination schedules being as effective as 3-12 week schedules.
Background: There are a myriad of vaccine schedules for rabies pre- (PrEP) and post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) that differ in the number and time doses, number of visits, length of schedule, and route of administration. The objective of this study was to systematically review the evidence and investigate how the differences in schedules influence titres over time. Methods: Four databases were searched from inception to January 2020 for rabies PrEP and PEP studies. A dose-response meta-analysis was utilised to pool geometric mean titres (GMT) over time. Subgroup analyses by route of administration, age group, and schedule were conducted. Results: 80 studies met the inclusion criteria and contributed with 191 datasets and 12,413 participants. Both intradermal (ID) and intramuscular (IM) PrEP/PEP produce adequate GMTs. Significantly lower GMT levels were achieved in older (>50yrs) compared to younger (<50yrs) participants. Short 1-week schedules were as effective as longer schedules that can take between 3 and 12 weeks to complete. Conclusions: Several effective ID and IM schedules were identified, the selection of a schedule should take into account the patient's needs, costs, availability to return for subsequent doses, and the time required to complete the schedule. Older individuals warrant special attention as they develop lower antibody response. (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据