Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36016940›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in immunology2022

Inactivated vaccine Covaxin/BBV152: A systematic review.

Tousief Irshad Ahmed, Saqib Rishi, Summaiya Irshad, Jyoti Aggarwal, Karan Happa, Sheikh Mansoor

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in immunology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 29 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Tousief Irshad AhmedDepartment of Clinical Biochemistry, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, JK, India.
Saqib RishiDepartment of Microbiology, Government Medical College, Srinagar, JK, India.
Summaiya IrshadDepartment of Ophthalmology, Government Medical College, Jammu, JK, India.
Jyoti AggarwalDepartment of Biochemistry, Maharishi Markandeshwar Institute of Medical Sciences and Research (MMIMSR), Ambala, HR, India.
Karan HappaDepartment of General Medicine, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, JK, India.
Sheikh MansoorAdvanced Centre for Human Genetics, Sher-I-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences, Srinagar, JK, India.
Sher-i-Kashmir Institute of Medical Sciences · INGovernment Medical College · INMaharishi Markandeshwar University, Mullana · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We systematically reviewed and summarized studies focusing on Bharat Biotech's Whole Virion Inactivated Corona Virus Antigen BBV152 (Covaxin), which is India's indigenous response to fighting the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Studies were searched for data on the efficacy, immunogenicity, and safety profile of BBV152. All relevant studies published up to March 22, 2022, were screened from major databases, and 25 studies were eventually inducted into the systematic review. The studies focused on the virus antigen (6 μg) adjuvanted with aluminium hydroxide gel and/or Imidazo quinolin gallamide (IMDG), aTLR7/8 agonist. Pre-clinical, phase I, and II clinical trials showed appreciable immunogenicity. Both neutralizing and binding antibody titers were significant and T cell responses were Th1-biased. Phase III trials on the 6 μg +Algel-IMDG formulation showed a 93.4% efficacy against severe COVID-19. Data from the trials revealed an acceptable safety profile with mostly mild-moderate local and systemic adverse events. No serious adverse events or fatalities were seen, and most studies reported milder and lesser adverse events with Covaxin when compared with other vaccines, especially Oxford-Astra Zeneca's AZD1222 (Covishield). The immunogenicity performance of Covaxin, which provided significant protection only after the second dose, was mediocre and it was consistently surpassed by Covishield. One study reported adjusted effectiveness against symptomatic infection to be just 50% at 2 weeks after the second dose. Nonetheless, appreciable results were seen in previously infected individuals administered both doses. There was some evidence of coverage against the Alpha, Beta, and Delta variants. However, neither Covaxin nor Covishield showed sufficient protection against the Omicron variant. Two studies reported super-additive results on mixing Covaxin with Covishield. Further exploration of heterologous prime-boost vaccination with a combination of an inactivated vaccine and an adenoviral vector-based vaccine for tackling future variants may be beneficial.

Indexed as

COVID-19Viral VaccinesChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesHumansSARS-CoV-2Vaccines, InactivatedChAdOx1 nCoV-19COVID-19 VaccinesVaccines, InactivatedViral VaccinesBBV152CovaxinCovishieldefficacyimmunogenicityinactivated vaccinesafety

Identifiers

PMID36016940
PMCPMC9395719
OpenAlexW4293512905

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.