ReviewVaccines2026
Efficacy and Safety of mRNA-Based COVID-19 Vaccines in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Review in Vaccines, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSolid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are highly vulnerable to severe COVID-19 infection, yet initial vaccine trials provided limited data on efficacy and safety in this immunocompromised population. Heterogeneous seroconversion rates and conflicting safety reports complicate the formulation of clear clinical guidelines. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to aggregate existing evidence to determine the precise seroconversion and safety profiles of COVID-19 vaccines and identify key factors influencing immune response in SOTRs.
methodsA comprehensive literature search was conducted identifying 125 studies evaluating WHO/FDA-authorized vaccines in SOTRs. Outcomes were the pooled seroconversion proportion and safety profile. Subgroup analyses were performed based on vaccine type, transplanted organ, number of doses, and prior SARS-CoV-2 infection status, confirmed by leave-one-out sensitivity analysis and bootstrap methods.
resultsMost studies assessed mRNA-based vaccines (123/125, 98.4%). The overall pooled seroconversion proportion across all SOTRs was significantly blunted at 0.49 (95% CI, 0.43 to 0.55), demonstrating high heterogeneity (I
conclusionsSOTRs exhibit profound hypo responsiveness to COVID-19 vaccines; however, the extreme heterogeneity observed across studies necessitates a cautious interpretation of pooled seroconversion estimates. While the data indicates a significant dose-response relationship favoring an aggressive, multi-dose strategy, the apparent safety profile may reflect under-reporting and limited follow-up rather than confirmed safety equivalence. Rare but clinically critical outcomes, such as acute allograft rejection, remain inadequately characterized in the current literature. Consequently, while the prioritization of multi-dose regimens and hybrid immunity is supported to maximize protection, clinicians must recognize that individual responses remain highly variable, and the long-term immunological impact of repeated stimulation requires further standardized investigation.
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.