Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39999100›Full record

ArticlePLOS global public health2025

Evaluating the safety profile of the CoronaVac in adult and older adult populations: A phase IV prospective observational study in Brazil.

Vanessa Infante, Monica Akissue de Camargo Teixeira Cintra, Eder Gatti Fernandes, Ana Paula Loch, Lucas Ragiotto, Patrícia Emília Braga, Maria da Graça Salomão, Maria Beatriz Bastos Lucchesi, Mayra Martho Moura de Oliveira, Vera Lúcia Gattás and 6 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PLOS global public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

16 authors.

Vanessa InfanteClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Monica Akissue de Camargo Teixeira CintraClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Eder Gatti FernandesClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Ana Paula LochClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1725-4213
Lucas RagiottoClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5152-0984
Patrícia Emília BragaClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Maria da Graça SalomãoClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Maria Beatriz Bastos LucchesiClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Mayra Martho Moura de OliveiraClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Vera Lúcia GattásClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
Anderson Soares da SilvaCentro de Saúde Escola da Faculdade de Medicina de Ribeirão Preto da Universidade de São Paulo (HCFMRP-USP) Dr. Joel Domingos Machado, São Paulo, Brazil.
Paulo José Fortes Villas BoasCentro de Saúde Escola da Faculdade de Medicina de Botucatu-Unesp, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9876-3222
Marta Heloisa LopesCentro de Referência de Imunobiológicos Especiais Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo (CRIE-HCFMUSP), São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5236-6248
José MoreiraClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3349-5321
Fernanda Castro BoulosClinical Trials and Pharmacovigilance Center, Instituto Butantan, São Paulo, Brazil.
CFV-01-IB study group

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This Phase IV prospective observational study aimed to evaluate the frequency of solicited and unsolicited adverse reactions within seven days following the administration of each dose of CoronaVac (14-day interval) by age group (18-59 years and ≥60 years). Participants (n = 538; 487 adults and 51 older adults) were enrolled from three public health centers in São Paulo, Brazil from May 2021 to January 2022. The study involved a two-dose vaccination regimen administered 14 days apart. Solicited and unsolicited adverse reactions (ARs) were assessed within seven days after each dose, and medically attended adverse events following immunization (AEFI) were monitored for 42 days. Safety data were collected through participant diary cards, telephone follow-ups, and on-site visits. Among adults, the most frequently reported local AR after the first and second doses was pain (256 [52.6%] and 129 [29.5%], respectively), while the most common systemic AR was headache (158 [34.5%] and 51 [11.6%], respectively). Most local and systemic solicited ARs were of Grade 1 or 2 severity, with ARs being more prevalent in adults following the first dose. One serious adverse event related to the vaccine was reported in adults, with no fatalities. Nine adult participants experienced adverse events of special interest, including five cases of COVID-19. These findings support the overall safety profile of CoronaVac in adults and older adult individuals, with adverse events being generally mild and self-limited.

Identifiers

PMID39999100
PMCPMC12048030

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.