Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34152403›Full record

SynthesisBlood advances2021

Vaccine response following anti-CD20 therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 905 patients.

Abi Vijenthira, Inna Gong, Stephen D Betschel, Matthew Cheung, Lisa K Hicks

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Blood advances, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 76 papers, 8 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
76citing papers in PubMed, 8 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

76 citing papers in PubMed, 8 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 101 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Trial
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Current Vaccination Principles and Practices in Adult Cancer Patients.Journal of clinical practice and research · 2026
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. Review

16 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Abi VijenthiraDivision of Medical Oncology and Hematology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5369-1501
Inna GongDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9306-2945
Stephen D BetschelDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Matthew CheungDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Lisa K HicksDepartment of Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
St. Michael's Hospital · CAUniversity of Toronto · CASunnybrook Health Science Centre · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature on vaccine responsiveness in patients who have received anti-CD20 therapy. PubMed and EMBASE were searched up to 4 January 2021 to identify studies of vaccine immunogenicity in patients treated with anti-CD20 therapy, including patients with hematologic malignancy or autoimmune disease. The primary outcomes were seroprotection (SP), seroconversion (SC), and/or seroresponse rates for each type of vaccine reported. As the pandemic influenza vaccine (2009 H1N1) has standardized definitions for SP and SC, and represented a novel primary antigen similar to the COVID-19 vaccine, meta-analysis was conducted for SC of studies of this vaccine. Pooled estimates, relative benefit ratios (RBs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Thirty-eight studies (905 patients treated with anti-CD20 therapy) were included (19 studies of patients with hematologic malignancies). Patients on active (<3 months since last dose) anti-CD20 therapy had poor responses to all types of vaccines. The pooled estimate for SC after 1 pandemic influenza vaccine dose in these patients was 3% (95% CI, 0% to 9%), with an RB of 0.05 (95% CI, 0-0.73) compared with healthy controls and 0.22 (95% CI, 0.09-0.56) compared with disease controls. SC compared with controls seems abrogated for at least 6 months following treatment (3-6 months post anti-CD20 therapy with an RB of 0.50 [95% CI, 0.24-1.06] compared with healthy and of 0.44 [95% CI, 0.23-0.84] compared with disease controls). For all vaccine types, response to vaccination improves incrementally over time, but may not reach the level of healthy controls even 12 months after therapy.

Indexed as

COVID-19Influenza A Virus, H1N1 SubtypeInfluenza, HumanCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansSARS-CoV-2COVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID34152403
PMCPMC8216656
OpenAlexW3176618462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.