ReviewVaccines2026
Dengue Vaccines in a Changing Epidemiological Landscape: Current Evidence, Unresolved Challenges, and Public Health Considerations.
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
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundDengue has expanded rapidly beyond traditional tropical and subtropical regions, driven by climate change, urbanization, population mobility, and the spread of competent Aedes vectors. Vaccination is an increasingly important component of dengue prevention, but development has been complicated by four viral serotypes, antibody-dependent enhancement, variable baseline serostatus, and the need for balanced and durable tetravalent immunity.
methodsWe conducted a narrative review of PubMed/MEDLINE, Google Scholar, ClinicalTrials.gov, and relevant public health and regulatory sources. Evidence on dengue epidemiology, immunopathogenesis, licensed vaccines, advanced candidates, efficacy, immunogenicity, safety, durability, and implementation was critically evaluated. Priority was given to randomized trials, long-term follow-up studies, regulatory assessments, and surveillance data. Evidence was synthesized descriptively without formal meta-analysis or risk-of-bias assessment.
resultsCYD-TDV was the first licensed dengue vaccine but is restricted to individuals with documented previous infection because seronegative recipients may experience an increased risk of severe dengue. TAK-003 has demonstrated overall efficacy against virologically confirmed dengue and dengue-related hospitalization in both baseline-seropositive and baseline-seronegative populations. However, protection is heterogeneous by serotype, and evidence remains limited or uncertain for some serotype-by-serostatus strata. Butantan-DV offers a promising single-dose strategy, but broader use requires additional long-term safety, effectiveness, and serotype-specific data. Inactivated, DNA, viral-vectored, virus-like particle, and mRNA vaccines remain investigational.
conclusionsDengue vaccination should be integrated with surveillance, vector control, clinical preparedness, and risk communication. Population-based vaccination is most appropriate in high-transmission settings, whereas selective, risk-based strategies are preferable in temperate regions. Continued pharmacovigilance and effectiveness monitoring are essential to guide safe and equitable implementation.
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.