ReviewVaccines2025
Meningococcal B Vaccines as a Paradigm of Safe and Effective Vaccines for Children.
Review in Vaccines, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Improving paediatric immunisation coverage rates: a position paper of the European Academy of Paediatrics.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background
objectiveThis article aims to present an example of how the EU regulatory framework allowed the early authorisation of two life-saving vaccines initially based on immunogenicity surrogates of clinical evidence. This was subsequently followed by post-marketing surveillance providing real-world evidence to support their safety profile and impact on the paediatric population in the EU.
methodsWe review the evidence supporting the initial regulatory approval of the vaccines, the confirmatory data demonstrating vaccine effectiveness post-authorisation, and the real-world impact of these vaccines on the paediatric population.
resultsTwo vaccines were approved in the EU for active immunisation to prevent IMD caused by MenB (4CMenB in 2013 and MenB-fHBP in 2017). Both marketing authorisations were based on immunogenicity data (efficacy studies were not feasible due to the rarity of the disease) and safety data generated from pre-authorisation studies. Additional pharmacovigilance activities to further investigate the safety profile and effectiveness studies were requested to be conducted after approval. Both the effectiveness and safety profile of the vaccines were confirmed by these data.
conclusionsThis paper illustrates that the EU medicines regulatory framework and safety monitoring system are robust. By supplementing the initial evidence with post-authorisation studies, further effectiveness and safety data enabled regulators to confirm the positive benefit-risk of the vaccines without delaying their access to the people who need them.
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.