scholarly journals Corrigendum: Immune Responses to Gametocyte Antigens in a Malaria Endemic Population—The African falciparum Context: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle K. Muthui ◽  
Alice Kamau ◽  
Teun Bousema ◽  
Andrew M. Blagborough ◽  
Philip Bejon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Endemic Population

scholarly journals Immune Responses to Gametocyte Antigens in a Malaria Endemic Population—The African falciparum Context: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michelle K. Muthui ◽  
Alice Kamau ◽  
Teun Bousema ◽  
Andrew M. Blagborough ◽  
Philip Bejon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Endemic Population

scholarly journals Assessment of humoral and cell-mediated immune responses to pertussis vaccination: a systematic review protocol

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (6) ◽  
pp. e028109 ◽  
Author(s):  
Funbi Akinola ◽  
Rudzani Muloiwa ◽  
Gregory, D Hussey ◽  
Violette Dirix ◽  
Benjamin Kagina ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Response ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Public Space ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Grey Literature ◽  
Assessment Tools ◽  
Population Type

IntroductionGlobally, some studies show a resurgence of pertussis. The risks and benefits of using whole-cell pertussis (wP) or acellular pertussis (aP) vaccines in the control of the disease have been widely debated. Better control of pertussis will require improved understanding of the immune response to pertussis vaccines. Improved understanding and assessment of the immunity induced by pertussis vaccines is thus imperative. Several studies have documented different immunological outcomes to pertussis vaccination from an array of assays. We propose to conduct a systematic review of the different immunological assays and outcomes used in the assessment of the humoraland cell-mediated immune response following pertussis vaccination.Methods and analysisThe primary outcomes for consideration are quality and quantity of immune responses (humoral and cell-mediated) post-pertussis vaccination. Of interest as secondary outcomes are types of immunoassays used in assessing immune responses post-pertussis vaccination, types of biological samples used in assessing immune responses post-pertussis vaccination, as well as the types of antigens used to stimulate these samples during post-pertussis vaccination immune response assessments. Different electronic databases (including PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCO Host, Scopus and Web of Science) will be accessed for peer-reviewed published and grey literature evaluating immune responses to pertussis vaccines between 1990 and 2019. The quality of included articles will be assessed using standardised risk and quality assessment tools specific to the study design used in each article. Data extraction will be done using a data extraction form. The extracted data will be analysed using STATA V.14.0 and RevMan V.5.3 software. A subgroup analysis will be conducted based on the study population, type of vaccine (wP or aP) and type of immune response (cell-mediated or humoral). Guidelines for reporting systematic reviews in the revised 2009 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement will be used in this study.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this study as it is a systematic review. We will only make use of data already available in the public space. Findings will be reported via publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at scientific meetings and workshops.Trial registration numberCRD42018102455.

scholarly journals Long-term Immune Responses to Vaccination in HIV-Infected Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2014 ◽  
Vol 58 (8) ◽  
pp. 1130-1139 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Kerneis ◽  
O. Launay ◽  
C. Turbelin ◽  
F. Batteux ◽  
T. Hanslik ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Meta Analysis

scholarly journals Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with haematological malignancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne S.K. Teh ◽  
Julien Coussement ◽  
Zoe C.F. Neoh ◽  
Tim Spelman ◽  
Smaro Lazarakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Cellular Response ◽  
Haematological Malignancy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Risk Patient ◽  
Seropositivity Rate ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
Underlying Malignancy ◽  
Patient Groups

The objectives of this study were to assess the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with haematological malignancy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies of immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination stratified by underlying malignancy and published from 1 January 2021 to 31 August 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Primary outcome was the rate of seropositivity following 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine with rates of seropositivity following 1 dose, rates of positive neutralising antibody (nAb), cellular responses and adverse events as secondary outcomes. Rates were pooled from single arm studies while rates of seropositivity were compared against the rate in healthy controls for comparator studies using a random effects model and expressed as a pooled odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Forty-four studies (16 mixed group, 28 disease specific) with 7064 patients were included in the analysis (2331 following first dose, 4733 following second dose). Overall seropositivity rates were 61-67% following 2 doses and 37-51% following 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. The lowest seropositivity rate was 51% in CLL patients and was highest in patients with acute leukaemia (93%). Following 1 dose, nAb and cellular response rates were 18-63% and 33-86% respectively. Active treatment, ongoing or recent treatment with targeted and CD-20 monoclonal antibody therapies within 12 months was associated with poor COVID-19 vaccine immune responses. New approaches to prevention are urgently required to reduce COVID-19 infection morbidity and mortality in high-risk patient groups that respond poorly to COVID-19 vaccination.

scholarly journals Immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with hematological malignancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joanne S.K. Teh ◽  
Julien Coussement ◽  
Zoe C.F. Neoh ◽  
Tim Spelman ◽  
Smaro Lazarakis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Cellular Response ◽  
Primary Outcome ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
High Risk Patient ◽  
Seropositivity Rate ◽  
Dose Rates ◽  
Underlying Malignancy ◽  
Patient Groups

The objectives of this study were to assess the immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccines in patients with haematological malignancy. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies of immune responses to COVID-19 vaccination stratified by underlying malignancy and published from 1 January 2021 to 31 August 2021 was conducted using MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL. Primary outcome was the rate of seropositivity following 2 doses of COVID-19 vaccine with rates of seropositivity following 1 dose, rates of positive neutralising antibody (nAb), cellular responses and adverse events as secondary outcomes. Rates were pooled from single arm studies while rates of seropositivity were compared against the rate in healthy controls for comparator studies using a random effects model and expressed as a pooled odds ratio with 95% confidence intervals. Forty-four studies (16 mixed group, 28 disease specific) with 7064 patients were included in the analysis (2331 following first dose, 4733 following second dose). Overall seropositivity rates were 61-67% following 2 doses and 37-51% following 1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine. The lowest seropositivity rate was 51% in CLL patients and was highest in patients with acute leukaemia (93%). Following 2 doses, nAb and cellular response rates were 57-60% and 40-75% respectively. Active treatment, ongoing or recent treatment with targeted and CD-20 monoclonal antibody therapies within 12 months was associated with poor COVID-19 vaccine immune responses. New approaches to prevention are urgently required to reduce COVID-19 infection morbidity and mortality in high-risk patient groups that respond poorly to COVID-19 vaccination.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Vaccines ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 467
Author(s):  
Ali Pormohammad ◽  
Mohammad Zarei ◽  
Saied Ghorbani ◽  
Mehdi Mohammadi ◽  
Mohammad Hossein Razizadeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Side Effects ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Receptor Binding Domain ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Vectored Vaccine ◽  
Local Side

The current study systematically reviewed, summarized and meta-analyzed the clinical features of the vaccines in clinical trials to provide a better estimate of their efficacy, side effects and immunogenicity. All relevant publications were systematically searched and collected from major databases up to 12 March 2021. A total of 25 RCTs (123 datasets), 58,889 cases that received the COVID-19 vaccine and 46,638 controls who received placebo were included in the meta-analysis. In total, mRNA-based and adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccines had 94.6% (95% CI 0.936–0.954) and 80.2% (95% CI 0.96.4–0.92.7) efficacy in phase II/III RCTs, respectively. Efficacy of the adenovirus-vectored vaccine after the first (97.6%; 95% CI 0.939–0.997) and second (98.2%; 95% CI 0.980–0.984) doses was the highest against receptor-binding domain (RBD) antigen after 3 weeks of injections. The mRNA-based vaccines had the highest level of side effects reported except for diarrhea and arthralgia. Aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines had the lowest systemic and local side effects between vaccines’ adjuvant or without adjuvant, except for injection site redness. The adenovirus-vectored and mRNA-based vaccines for COVID-19 showed the highest efficacy after first and second doses, respectively. The mRNA-based vaccines had higher side effects. Remarkably few experienced extreme adverse effects and all stimulated robust immune responses.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Specific Immunotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiang Chen ◽  
Guo Xiao-Zhong ◽  
Xing-Shun Qi
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Immune Responses ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Specific Immunotherapy ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Pooled Analysis ◽  
Autologous Tumor ◽  
Random Effects Model ◽  
Immunological Responses

Specific immunotherapies, including vaccines with autologous tumor cells and tumor antigen-specific monoclonal antibodies, are important treatments for PC patients. To evaluate the clinical outcomes of PC-specific immunotherapy, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of the relevant published clinical trials. The effects of specific immunotherapy were compared with those of nonspecific immunotherapy and the meta-analysis was executed with results regarding the overall survival (OS), immune responses data, and serum cancer markers data. The pooled analysis was performed by using the random-effects model. We found that significantly improved OS was noted for PC patients utilizing specific immunotherapy and an improved immune response was also observed. In conclusion, specific immunotherapy was superior in prolonging the survival time and enhancing immunological responses in PC patients.

The effects of low-ratio n-6/n-3 PUFA on biomarkers of inflammation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yali Wei ◽  
Yan Meng ◽  
Na Li ◽  
Qian Wang ◽  
Liyong Chen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Fatty Acid ◽  
Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Chain Polyunsaturated Fatty Acid ◽  
Inflammation Markers ◽  
Pufa Supplementation ◽  
Long Chain

The purpose of the systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine if low-ratio n-6/n-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) supplementation affects serum inflammation markers based on current studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document