Vaccine · 2026
Immunogenicity and safety of Sabin-strain inactivated poliovirus vaccine in infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hussain Muhammad, Hassan Muhammad, Athar Maryam, Khan Saifullah, Azam Muhammad Tayyab, Rathi Diya, Nawaz Javeria
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Poliomyelitis remains a threat to children under five despite global vaccination efforts. The Sabin-strain inactivated poliovirus vaccine (sIPV) has emerged as a safer alternative to conventional Salk-strain IPV (cIPV) due to lower biosafety requirements. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the immunogenicity and safety of sIPV compared with cIPV in healthy infants completing the primary IPV series.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs. Outcomes included seroconversion rates, seroprotection rates, geometric mean titers (GMTs), and adverse events. Data were pooled using random-effects models, and evidence certainty was assessed using RoB 2.0 and GRADE.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs with 4646 infants were included. Seroconversion rates were comparable: PV1 100% (RR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.01), PV2 102% (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98-1.07), PV3 100% (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.01). GMTs were higher for sIPV after PV1 (MD 1.50, 95% CI 0.98-2.02) and PV2 (MD 0.52, 95% CI 0.06-0.98). Local adverse events were similar (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.95-1.71), while systemic adverse events were higher with cIPV (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.15-1.60). Fever (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.20-1.87) and allergic reactions (OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.02-4.69) were slightly more frequent with sIPV.
CONCLUSIONS: sIPV provides immunogenicity comparable to cIPV with an acceptable safety profile in infants. Its lower biosafety requirements support its use in global polio eradication programs.
METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library were searched for RCTs. Outcomes included seroconversion rates, seroprotection rates, geometric mean titers (GMTs), and adverse events. Data were pooled using random-effects models, and evidence certainty was assessed using RoB 2.0 and GRADE.
RESULTS: Seven RCTs with 4646 infants were included. Seroconversion rates were comparable: PV1 100% (RR 1.00, 95% CI 1.00-1.01), PV2 102% (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.98-1.07), PV3 100% (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.01). GMTs were higher for sIPV after PV1 (MD 1.50, 95% CI 0.98-2.02) and PV2 (MD 0.52, 95% CI 0.06-0.98). Local adverse events were similar (OR 1.27, 95% CI 0.95-1.71), while systemic adverse events were higher with cIPV (OR 1.36, 95% CI 1.15-1.60). Fever (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.20-1.87) and allergic reactions (OR 2.19, 95% CI 1.02-4.69) were slightly more frequent with sIPV.
CONCLUSIONS: sIPV provides immunogenicity comparable to cIPV with an acceptable safety profile in infants. Its lower biosafety requirements support its use in global polio eradication programs.