ReviewVaccines2024
Immunogenicity and Safety of Chikungunya Vaccines: 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 6 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Immunogenicity and safety of inactivated TZ84- vs. HM175-based hepatitis A vaccines in pediatric populations: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2026Pooled it
- Umbrella review of the safety of Chikungunya vaccine platforms used in other vaccines.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical outcomes of chikungunya across age groups: A systematic review.PLoS neglected tropical diseases · 2025Pooled it
- Mapping Human Clinical Evidence for Chikungunya Vaccines: A Scoping Review of Immunogenicity, Durability, and Safety.Vaccines · 2026Review
- Chikungunya in 2025: Comprehensive Insights into Virology, Diagnostics, Vaccines, and Antiviral Therapies.Viruses · 2026Review
- Quality and reliability evaluation of chikungunya fever-related video content on Tiktok and Bilibili: A cross-sectional study.Digital healthArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Several vaccines against chikungunya fever have been developed and tested, and one has been recently licensed. We performed a meta-analysis to estimate the immunogenicity and safety of all chikungunya vaccines that have been progressed to clinical trial evaluation (VLA1553; mRNA-1388/VAL-181388; PXVX0317/VRC-CHKVLP059-00-VP; ChAdOx1 Chik; MV-CHIK). We included trials retrieved from MedLine, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov. The outcomes were the rates of seroconversion/seroresponse and serious adverse events (SAEs) after the primary immunization course. We retrieved a total of 14 datasets, including >4000 participants. All candidate chikungunya vaccines were able to elicit an immunogenic response in ≥96% of vaccinated subjects, regardless of the vaccination schedule and platform used, and the seroconversion/seroresponse rates remained high 6 to 12 months after vaccination for most vaccines. Four of the five candidate vaccines showed a good overall safety profile (no data were available for ChAdOx1 Chik), with no significant increase in the risk of SAEs among the vaccinated, and a low absolute risk of product-related SAEs. Overall, the present findings support the potential use of the candidate vaccines for the prevention of chikungunya and the current indication for use in adult travelers to endemic regions of the licensed VLA 1553 vaccine. In order to extend chikungunya vaccination to a wider audience, further studies are needed on individuals from endemic countries and frail populations.
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.