ReviewVaccines2024
A Comparison of the Immunogenicity and Safety of an Additional Heterologous versus Homologous COVID-19 Vaccination among Non-Seroconverted Immunocompromised Patients after a Two-Dose Primary Series of mRNA Vaccination: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Vaccines, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impaired antibody responses to heterologous ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 and BNT162b2 vaccination in individuals with type 2 diabetes.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Immunogenicity and safety to SARS-Cov-2 vaccination in patients with systemic vasculitis.Frontiers in immunology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the immunogenicity and safety of an additional heterologous (viral vector) versus homologous (mRNA) COVID-19 vaccine dose among non-seroconverted immunocompromised patients after a two-dose primary series of mRNA vaccine. We searched studies published up to 21 June 2023 in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase. The meta-analysis was conducted to compare the seropositivity rates based on anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike protein IgG (anti-S IgG) and SARS-CoV-2-specific T-cell immune response rates, assessed by interferon-γ release assay at 4 weeks, and the incidences of serious adverse events (SAEs) within 28 days between the two vaccine regimens. In four included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), there were no statistically significant differences in the seropositive rate of anti-S IgG (risk ratio [RR]: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.48-1.29) and the concentration of SARS-CoV-2 interferon-γ (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.96-1.48) between heterologous and homologous regimens. The heterologous regimen exhibited a significantly lower incidence of injection pain (RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.45-0.69), but a higher incidence of headache (RR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.02-2.02) compared with the homologous regimen. No vaccine-related SAEs were reported within 28 days following vaccination. An additional heterologous or homologous COVID-19 vaccine dose was well tolerated and demonstrated a comparable vaccine immunogenicity among non-seroconverted immunocompromised patients who were initially vaccinated with a two-dose COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. This finding supports the recommendations of an extended primary series of COVID-19 vaccination in immunocompromised persons.
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.