Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37492421›Full record

ArticleThe Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia2023

Active safety surveillance of rabies monoclonal antibody and rabies vaccine in patients with category III potential rabies exposure.

Gagandeep Kang, Anand Lakhkar, Chetanraj Bhamare, Abhijeet Dharmadhikari, Jyoti Narwadkar, Arti Kanujia, Dhananjay Kapse, Bhagwat Gunale, Cyrus S Poonawalla, Prasad S Kulkarni

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Lancet regional health. Southeast Asia, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Rabies post-exposure prophylaxis in India: a SWOT analysis.Therapeutic advances in vaccines and immunotherapy · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Gagandeep KangTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute, Faridabad, India.
Anand LakhkarSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Chetanraj BhamareSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Abhijeet DharmadhikariSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Jyoti NarwadkarSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Arti KanujiaLabCorp Scientific Services & Solutions Pvt Ltd, Mumbai, India.
Dhananjay KapseSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Bhagwat GunaleSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Cyrus S PoonawallaSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Prasad S KulkarniSerum Institute of India Pvt Ltd, Pune, India.
Serum Institute of India (India) · INTranslational Health Science and Technology Institute · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: A vero cell-based inactivated Rabies Vaccine (Rabivax-S) and Rabies Human Monoclonal Antibody (Rabishield) have been approved since 2016. A post-marketing surveillance was conducted in India from 2020 to 2021 to gather real world safety data on Rabivax-S and Rabishield. Methods: This was non-interventional active surveillance in patients with category III potential rabies exposure who were administered a post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) regimen (Rabishield and Rabivax-S) by their healthcare providers (HCPs) as per the dosages and regimens mentioned in the package insert approved by the Indian regulators. The approved schedule for PEP was local infiltration of Rabishield on Day 0 and five doses of Rabivax-S on Day 0, 3, 7, 14, and 28 (Intramuscular route, IM) or four doses of Rabivax-S on Day 0, 3, 7, and 28 (Intradermal route, ID). The primary objective of this surveillance was to generate real-world evidence on the safety and tolerability of Rabishield and Rabivax-S. All patients enrolled in the surveillance were required to report any adverse events (AEs) occurring up to Day 31 after initiation of PEP (administration of Rabishield and the first dose of Rabivax-S) to their HCP. Findings: A total of 1000 patients with category III potential rabies exposure were enrolled across India. 991 patients received the PEP regimen with IM Rabivax-S while 9 received a PEP regimen with the ID regimen. While 32% of the patients were <12 years of age, 11.8% were ≥12 to <18 years of age and 56.2% were ≥18 years of age. The entire PEP regimen was completed by 97.3% of the enrolled patients. A total of 69 AEs were reported in 64 patients. Out of these, 49 AEs in 47 patients were assessed as causally related to the study products (26 with Rabishield and 23 with Rabivax-S). The majority of the AEs were mild and all recovered without any sequelae. One serious adverse event (SAE) of fracture of the hand was reported which was not related to either Rabishield or Rabivax-S. No case of rabies was reported. Interpretation: Rabishield and Rabivax-S have an excellent safety profile and are well tolerated. No participant developed rabies during 31 day follow up. Funding: The PMS was funded by Serum institute of India Private Limited which is the manufacturer of the study products.

Indexed as

Post-marketing surveillanceRabies human monoclonal antibodyRabies vaccineSafety

Identifiers

PMID37492421
PMCPMC10363514
OpenAlexW4376651128

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.