Active Surveillance Of The Sputnik V Vaccine In Health Workers
Pagotto, V.; Ferloni, A.; Soriano, M. M.; Diaz, M.; Braguinsky, N.; Asprea, V.; staneloni, M. I.; Vidal, G. G.; Silveira, M. G.; Zingoni, P.; Aliperti, V.; Michelangelo, H.; Figar, s.
Show abstract
IntroductionThe World Health Organization (WHO) recommends vaccination against Sars Cov-2 coronavirus to mitigate COVID-19 pandemic. On December 29th, the Argentine Ministry of Health started a vaccination plan with the Sputnik V vaccine emphasizing the registration of the Events Supposedly Attributed to Vaccines and Immunizations (ESAVI) in the National Surveillance System. The aim of this study is to determine the safety of this vaccine. MethodsIn an ongoing cohort study, health professionals from Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires vaccinated with the first component of the Sputnik V vaccine (a rAd26 vector-based) were followed up. Safety at 72 hs was analysed from a self-report form. Local and systemic reactions were characterized as mild, moderate and severe. Incident rates were calculated per 1000 person-hours by age groups and gender. Adjusted hazard ratio and 95% Confidence Interval (HR; 95%CI) is obtained by Cox Regression Model. Results707 health professionals (mean age 35, 67% female) were vaccinated, response rate was 96,6% and 71,3% reported at least one ESAVI. Rate was 6.3 per 1.000 person-hours. Among local reactions, 54% reported pain at the injection site, 11% redness and swelling. Among systemic reactions 40% reported fever, 5% diarrhea and 68% new or worsened muscle pain. Five percent had serious adverse events that required medical evaluation and one inpatient. ESAVI rate was higher among females (65.4% vs 50%; HR 1.38, 95%CI 1.13-5.38) and in younger than 55 years-old (72.8% vs 32%; HR 2.66, 95%CI 1.32-1.68). ConclusionActive surveillance on safety for vaccines with emergency approval is mandatory. This study shows high rates of local and systemic reactions however early serious events were rare. Short term safety is supported by these preliminary findings. Studies on long term safety and efficacy, accoding sex and age, are needed.
Matching journals
The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Immunogenicity and adverse events of priming with inactivated whole SARS-CoV-2 vaccine (CoronaVac) followed by boosting the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine 96%
- Systemic adverse effects induced by the BNT162b2 vaccine are associated with higher antibody titers from 3 to 6 months after vaccination 96%
- Safety and immunogenicity of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine in adolescents aged 12-17 years in Thai population, prospective cohort study 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Efficacy and Safety of an Inactivated Whole-Virion SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (CoronaVac) in Brazilian Healthcare Professionals: The PROFISCOV Trial 96%
- A randomized, double-blind phase I clinical trial of two recombinant dimeric RBD COVID-19 vaccine candidates: safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity 96%
- SARS-CoV-2-antibody response in health care workers after vaccination or natural infection in a longitudinal observational study 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Safety and immunogenicity of a heterologous booster with an RBD virus-like particle vaccine following two- or three-dose inactivated COVID-19 vaccine 94%
- Immunogenicity and safety of COVID-19 vaccine in lung cancer patients receiving anticancer treatment: A prospective multicenter cohort study 94%
- Safety and immunogenicity of SCB-2019, an adjuvanted, recombinant SARS-CoV-2 trimeric S-protein subunit COVID-19 vaccine in healthy 12–17 year-old adolescents 93%
Similar papers in this journal
- Antibody response to SARS-CoV-2 vaccination is extremely vivacious in subjects with previous SARS-CoV-2 infection 96%
- Characterization of the significant decline in humoral immune response six months post-SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination: A systematic review 95%
- Comprehensive genomic, immunological and clinical analysis of COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections: a prospective, comparative cohort study 92%
Similar papers in this journal
- Adenovirus and RNA-based COVID-19 vaccines: perceptions and acceptance among healthcare workers 95%
- Reports of myocarditis and pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines: A systematic review of spontaneously reported data from the UK, Europe, and the US and of the literature 94%
- COVID-19 vaccines and evidence-based medicine 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.