Trial reportJournal of Crohn's & colitis2016
Sci-B-VacTM Vs ENGERIX-B Vaccines for Hepatitis B Virus in Patients with Inflammatory Bowel Diseases: A Randomised Controlled Trial.
Trial report in Journal of Crohn's & colitis, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Application and Research Progress of Self-Assembling Protein Nanoparticles in Vaccine Development.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Hepatitis B Vaccine: Four Decades on.Vaccines · 2024Review
- Design and characterization of chimeric Rabies-SARS-CoV-2 virus-like particles for vaccine purposes.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2023Article
- Efficacy of hepatitis B vaccination in patients with ulcerative colitis: a prospective cohort study.Intestinal research · 2022Article
- Management of hepatitis B virus infection in patients with inflammatory bowel disease under immunosuppressive treatment.World journal of gastroenterology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
aimsResponse rate to second-generation hepatitis B virus vaccines is relatively low in patients with inflammatory bowel diseases compared with the general healthy population. We compared the efficacy and safety of a third- vs a second-generation hepatitis B virus vaccine in a group of patients with inflammatory bowel diseases treated with immunosuppressive medications.
methodsProspective, randomised, single-blind, controlled study. Eligible patients were randomly assigned to receive one of two vaccines, ENGERIX-B or Sci-B-Vac. The vaccines were administered in three doses at 0, 1, and 6 months. The primary endpoint was defined as the titre of anti-hepatitis B S [HBs] antibodies following the standard three-dose hepatitis B virus vaccination schedule.
resultsA total of 72 patients complied with study protocol [37 and 35 patients in the ENGERIX-B and Sci-B-Vac groups, respectively]. Overall, 75% of the cohort seroconverted. The primary endpoint was met in 81.1% in the ENGERIX-B group and 68.6% in the Sci-B-Vac group [p = 0.22]. Patients in the Sci-B-Vac group showed a statistically significant decreased seroconversion rate compared with the ENGERIX-B group, with use of tumour necrosis factor [TNF] alpha inhibitors [p = 0.03], and higher degree of disease activity [p = 0.03].
conclusionsOverall seroconversion rate in our cohort was higher than in previous reports in the literature, possibly due to a low disease activity state in the majority of participants. Third-generation hepatitis B virus vaccines showed no apparent advantage over standard of care vaccine in this patient group.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.