Observational studyHuman vaccines & immunotherapeutics2022
Safety profile of MenB-FHBp vaccine among adolescents: data from surveillance of Adverse Events Following Immunization in Puglia (Italy), 2018-2020.
Observational study in Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Joint consensus on reducing the burden of invasive meningococcal disease in the Asia-Pacific region.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Review
- Escherichia coli in the production of biopharmaceuticals.Biotechnology and applied biochemistry · 2025Review
- Policies for the immunization against serogroup B meningococcus for adolescents immunized during the first two years of life: A mini review.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2024Review
- Vaccine hesitancy in adolescents regarding COVID-19 vaccination: A literature review.Vaccine: X · 2024Review
- Meningococcal B Immunisation in Adults and Potential Broader Immunisation Strategies: A Narrative Review.Infectious diseases and therapy · 2023Review
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
MenB-FHBp was licensed in Europe in 2017 from the age of 10. In the "postmarketing life" of a new vaccine, surveillance of Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) is crucial, to better understand the pattern of safety and the effectiveness. This paper describes the MenB-FHBp AEFIs notified in Puglia in 2018-2021, to take a picture of the safety profile of this vaccine in the real life, four years after its introduction in Italy. This is a retrospective observational study. Data were collected from the list of AEFIs notified after MenB-FHBp vaccine administration in Puglia in 2018-2020, and the number of doses of this vaccine administered in the same period. AEFIs were classified according to WHO's algorithm, and causality assessment was carried out for serious AEFIs. From January 2018 to December 2020, in Puglia, 43,061 doses of MenB-FHBp were administered and 42 MenB-FHBp AEFIs (reporting rate: 97.5 per 100,000 doses administered) were reported. Among these, 12 were classified as severe (28.6%; reporting rate 27.9 per 100,000 doses). Overall, the male/female ratio in AEFIs was 1:1. The median age of people who suffered from AEFIs was 12 years (range 11-13). For the 11 serious AEFIs for which the classification was "consistent causal association," the diagnosis was hyperpyrexia (reporting rate 13.9 per 100,000 doses), fainting (rate 4.6 per 100,000 doses), urticaria (rate 2,3 per 100,000 doses), convulsions (rate 2,3 per 100,000 doses), and vomit (rate 2,3 per 100,000 doses). No deaths or impairment were notified in studied AEFIs. The picture of MenB-FHBp vaccine supports that the risk of AEFIs is in line with previous published data and in general acceptable.
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.