Trial reportVaccine2022
A Brighton Collaboration standardized template with key considerations for a benefit/risk assessment for an inactivated viral vaccine against Chikungunya virus.
Trial report in Vaccine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chikungunya in 2025: Comprehensive Insights into Virology, Diagnostics, Vaccines, and Antiviral Therapies.Viruses · 2026Review
- A Review of the Biology of Chikungunya Virus Highlighting the Development of Current Novel Therapeutic and Prevention Approaches.Pathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Inactivated Viral Vaccine BBV87 Protects Against Chikungunya Virus Challenge in a Non-Human Primate Model.Viruses · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 4 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Inactivated viral vaccines have long been used in humans for diseases of global health threat (e.g., poliomyelitis and pandemic and seasonal influenza) and the technology of inactivation has more recently been used for emerging diseases such as West Nile, Chikungunya, Ross River, SARS and especially for COVID-19. The Brighton Collaboration Benefit-Risk Assessment of VAccines by TechnolOgy (BRAVATO) Working Group has prepared standardized templates to describe the key considerations for the benefit and risk of several vaccine platform technologies, including inactivated viral vaccines. This paper uses the BRAVATO inactivated virus vaccine template to review the features of an inactivated whole chikungunya virus (CHIKV) vaccine that has been evaluated in several preclinical studies and clinical trials. The inactivated whole CHIKV vaccine was cultured on Vero cells and inactivated by ß-propiolactone. This provides an effective, flexible system for high-yield manufacturing. The inactivated whole CHIKV vaccine has favorable thermostability profiles, compatible with vaccine supply chains. Safety data are compiled in the current inactivated whole CHIKV vaccine safety database with unblinded data from the ongoing studies: 850 participants from phase II study (parts A and B) outside of India, and 600 participants from ongoing phase II study in India, and completed phase I clinical studies for 60 subjects. Overall, the inactivated whole CHIKV vaccine has been well tolerated, with no significant safety issues identified. Evaluation of the inactivated whole CHIKV vaccine is continuing, with 1410 participants vaccinated as of 20 April 2022. Extensive evaluation of immunogenicity in humans shows strong, durable humoral immune responses.
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.