Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37464440›Full record

Trial reportVirology journal2023

Safety and efficacy of the FAKHRAVAC compared with BBIBP-Corv2 against SARS-CoV-2 in adults: a non-inferiority multi-center trial.

Masoud Solaymani-Dodaran, Pouria Basiri, Milad Moradi, Kimiya Gohari, Ali Sheidaei, Mohammadreza Ahi, Farzad Ghafoori Naeeni, Akram Ansarifar, Zahra Rahimi, Fatemeh Gholami and 9 more

Open access · goldAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialMulticenter StudyPragmatic Clinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Virology journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 41% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
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

19 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Masoud Solaymani-Dodaran *Clinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Pouria Basiri *Clinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Milad MoradiStem Cell Technology Research Center (STRC), Tehran, Iran.
Kimiya GohariClinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ali SheidaeiClinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammadreza AhiClinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Farzad Ghafoori NaeeniStem Cell Technology Research Center (STRC), Tehran, Iran.
Akram AnsarifarClinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Zahra RahimiClinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Fatemeh GholamiClinical Trial Center (CTC) of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Ahmad Karimi RahjerdiMilad Daro Noor Pharmaceutical (MDNP) Company, Tehran, Iran.
Ramin Hamidi FarahaniAJA University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Kosar Naderi SaffarStem Cell Technology Research Center (STRC), Tehran, Iran.
Soheil GhasemiMilad Daro Noor Pharmaceutical (MDNP) Company, Tehran, Iran.
Ali ShooshtariMilad Daro Noor Pharmaceutical (MDNP) Company, Tehran, Iran.
Mohsen HonariMilad Daro Noor Pharmaceutical (MDNP) Company, Tehran, Iran.
Ali MozafariMilad Daro Noor Pharmaceutical (MDNP) Company, Tehran, Iran.
Samane KhodaverdlooMilad Daro Noor Pharmaceutical (MDNP) Company, Tehran, Iran.
Mohsen ForooghizadehMalek Ashtar University of Technology, Tehran, Iran. mohsenforooghizadeh@gmail.com.
Iran University of Medical Sciences · IRMilad Hospital · IRStem Cell Technology Research Center · IRAja University of Medical Sciences · IRMalek Ashtar University of Technology · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe compared Fakhravac and BBIBP-Corv2 vaccines in a phase III trial.

methodWe conducted a multicenter, parallel-group, active-control, non-inferiority clinical trial with pragmatic considerations assessing the safety and efficacy of Fakhravac and BBIBP-Corv2 vaccines. We started with two randomized double-blind arms and added two non-randomized open-label arms (based on participant preference) because of slow recruitment. The adult population received 0.5 ml (10 µg per dose) intramuscular injections of Fakhravac or BBIBP-Corv-2 vaccines 21 days apart. The primary outcome was the occurrence of PCR-positive symptomatic Covid-19 disease 14 days or more after the second injection. A 10% non-inferiority margin to the reported 72.8% efficacy of BBIBP-Corv2 was assumed. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to estimate hazard ratios and their 95% confidence intervals.

resultWe enrolled 24,056 adults in four groups (randomized-Fakhravac: 824, randomized-BBIBP-Corv2: 832; Non-randomized-Fakhravac: 19,429, Non-randomized-BBIBP-Corv2: 2971). All observed local and systemic adverse reactions were generally self-limited and resolved completely. We observed similar Serious Adverse Event (SAE) rates in the BBIBP-Corv2 (2.57, 95% CI 1.33-4.49) and Fakhravac (2.25, 95% CI 1.72-2.89) groups; none of which were related to the vaccines received. We recorded 9815 Medically Attendant Adverse Events (MAAE), 736 of which were categorized as somehow related. The rate of related MAAE in the Fakhravac was similar to the BBIBP-Corv2 groups (0.31 and 0.26 per 1000 person-day) in the randomized and considerably higher (0.24 and 0.07 per 1000 person-day) in the non-randomized arms. We observed 129 (35% of the 365 required by target sample size) events of PCR + symptomatic Covid-19 during four months of active follow-up in the randomized arm, demonstrating that those receiving the Fakhravac vaccine were significantly less likely (HR = 0.69; 95% CI 0.49-0.98) to be diagnosed with PCR + symptomatic Covid-19 compared with those receiving BBIBP-Corv2 vaccine. After adjusting for type I error using the O'Brien Fleming method, the Fakhravac vaccine was non-inferior to the BBIBP-Corv2 (assuming a 10% non-inferiority margin to the reported 72.8% BBIBP-Corv2 vaccine efficacy; HR < 1.35) (One-way test: HR = 0.66; 99.8% CI 0.38-1.15). In the non-randomized arm, the results were inconclusive (HR = 1.23; 95% CI 0.96-1.61). We observed 5 cases of hospitalized Covid-19 in the randomized arm, none of which occurred in the Fakhravac vaccine group. Those receiving the Fakhravac vaccine were four times less likely to go to the hospital because of a Covid-19 diagnosis (HR = 0.24; 95% CI 0.10-0.60). The vaccine efficacy of the Fakhravac vaccine is estimated to be 81.5% (95% CI 81-82.4%).

conclusionFakhravac inactivated SARS-CoV-2 vaccine has comparable safety and efficacy to the BBIBP-Corv2 vaccine. Trial registration This study was registered with the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials ( www.irct.ir : IRCT20210206050259N3).

Indexed as

COVID-19COVID-19 VaccinesAdultCOVID-19 TestingDouble-Blind MethodHumansIranSARS-CoV-2Vaccines, InactivatedBIBP COVID-19 vaccineCOVID-19 VaccinesVaccines, InactivatedBBIBP-Corv2FakhravacInactivated Covid-19 vaccinePhase III non-inferiority trial

Identifiers

PMID37464440
PMCPMC10355035
OpenAlexW4384665373

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.