ReviewVaccines2026
Immunogenicity and Safety of RSVPreF3 OA Coadministration Versus Sequential Administration in Adults: 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. 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
BACKGROUND/
objectivesAdults eligible for respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccination may also receive influenza, COVID-19, pneumococcal, or herpes zoster vaccines. We compared immunogenicity and safety between coadministration and sequential schedules.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and CENTRAL from inception to 3 August 2026 for randomized trials in adults aged 50 years or older. Eligible trials compared RSVPreF3 OA coadministration with sequential administration of the partner vaccine followed by RSVPreF3 OA. Random-effects models pooled neutralizing-antibody geometric mean ratios (GMRs; coadministration/sequential) separately for RSV-A and RSV-B and risk ratios for safety outcomes. Risk of bias and certainty were assessed using RoB 2 and GRADE, respectively.
resultsSix trials randomized 5455 participants. Pooled RSV-A and RSV-B GMRs were 0.895 (95% CI 0.816-0.983) and 0.922 (95% CI 0.837-1.016), respectively. In trial-specific per-protocol analyses, non-inferiority criteria were met for recombinant zoster vaccine (RZV) and 20-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV20) antibody endpoints, but non-inferiority was not demonstrated for SARS-CoV-2 XBB.1.5 neutralizing antibodies (GMR 0.763, 95% CI 0.662-0.885) or the adjuvanted quadrivalent influenza vaccine A/H3N2 response. The pooled risk ratio for serious adverse events was 0.831 (95% CI 0.530-1.303), with limited precision. Certainty was low for RSV-A and very low for RSV-B, mainly reflecting risk of bias and inconsistency.
conclusionsIn adults aged 50 years or older, same-day RSVPreF3 OA coadministration was associated with lower RSV-neutralizing antibody responses than sequential administration, while partner-vaccine immunogenicity varied by product and antigen. Non-inferiority was not demonstrated for the SARS-CoV-2 XBB.1.5 and adjuvanted-QIV A/H3N2 antibody endpoints. No clear safety difference between schedules was identified, and the clinical significance of the antibody differences remains uncertain. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD420261470812.
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.