ReviewVaccines2026
Mapping Human Clinical Evidence for Chikungunya Vaccines: A Scoping Review of Immunogenicity, Durability, and Safety.
Review in Vaccines, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
Two chikungunya (CHIKV) vaccines have now been licensed, but the human clinical evidence base remains fragmented across vaccine platforms, populations, follow-up periods, and safety settings, complicating product-specific interpretation of durability and benefit-risk. We conducted a PRISMA-ScR-guided scoping review of human CHIKV vaccine evidence indexed in PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science from January 2000 to June 2026. After screening 890 records, we included 77 sources of evidence and mapped them at both the record level and the candidate/product level. The included evidence clustered around a limited number of vaccine programs, including TSI-GSD-218, VRC-CHKVLP059-00-VP/PXVX0317/Vimkunya, MV-CHIK/V184, VLA1553/IXCHIQ, ChAdOx1 Chik, and mRNA-1388/VAL-181388. Late-stage and post-authorization evidence was concentrated mainly in VLA1553/IXCHIQ and PXVX0317/Vimkunya, whereas viral-vector and mRNA candidates remained largely restricted to early-phase adult studies. Evidence has expanded to adolescents and adults aged ≥65 years for selected products but remains limited or product-specific for children, pregnant individuals, immunocompromised populations, and medically complex older adults. Short-term trial safety data were characterized primarily by mild or moderate local and systemic reactogenicity, while post-authorization safety evidence remains recent and concentrated in licensed products. This scoping review provides a structured evidence map for CHIKV vaccine development and highlights priorities for standardized immunogenicity assessment, longer-term durability data, broader population representation, endemic-region effectiveness studies, and continued post-marketing surveillance.
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.