Efficacy Of The Measles-Mumps-Rubella (Mmr) Vaccine In The Reducing The Severity Of COVID-19: An Interim Analysis Of A Randomised Controlled Clinical Trial
Fedrizzi, E. N.; Girondi, J. B. R.; Sakae, T. M.; Steffens, S. M.; Silvestrin, A. N. d. S.; Claro, G. S.; Iskenderian, H. A.; Hillmann, B.; Gervasi, L. C.; Trapani, A.; Rodrigues, P. d. A.; Vieira, A. d. S.; Evaristo, S. M.; Tristao, F. R.; Muniz, F. d. S.; Nunes, M. V.; Beatriz, N. Z.; Elpo, J.; Tiedje, A.; Siqueira, L. S.; Sens, M.; Nandi, V.; Pereira, J. G.; Henrique, G. C.; de Carvalho, A. P. F.; de Morais, R. C. P.; de Cristo, G. G.; Hochsprung, M. E.; Morais, A. C.; Centenaro, R.; Garcia, A.; Silva, B. H.; Ouriques Neta, E. L.; Ferreira, M. E. A.; Hames, M. E.; Gubert, M. E. P.; Calegari
10.1101/2021.09.14.21263598 medRxivShow abstract
BackgroundCOVID-19 is still a challenge, both with regard to its treatment and to the actual efficacy of the vaccines available to date, especially with the emergence of new variants. We evaluated the efficacy of the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severity of COVID-19 in health workers. MethodsThis analysis includes data from one ongoing blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial with participants aged 18-60 years were randomly assigned to receive the MMR vaccine or a placebo. The primary efficacy analysis included all participants with a positive nasopharyngeal RT-PCR test since their inclusion. ResultsThe MMR vaccine did not prevent the SARS-CoV-2 infection. Participants in the MMR group, compared with those in the placebo group, had a 48% risk reduction in symptomatic COVID-19 (RR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.33-0.83; p=0.004) and a 76% risk reduction in COVID-19 treatment (RR = 0.24; 95% CI: 0.06 - 0.88; p = 0.020) with one dose and a 51% risk reduction in COVID-19 symptoms (RR = 0.49; 95% CI: 0.31 - 0.78; p = 0.001) and a 78% risk reduction in COVID-19 treatment (RR = 0.22; 95% CI: 0.06 - 0.82; p = 0.015) with two doses. ConclusionsThis interim analysis of an ongoing clinical trial suggests that compared with a placebo, the vaccine reduces the risk of COVID-19 symptoms and reduces the need for COVID-19 treatment. Clinical Trials RegistryBrazilian Clinical Trials Registry (ReBEC n{degrees} RBR-2xd6dkj - https://ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-2xd6dkj). HIGHLIGHTSO_LIThe MMR vaccine can stimulate the innate immunity inducing a nonspecific protection against other infections, called heterologous immunity. C_LIO_LIRepeated exposure to the antigen (innate immune response training) results in an extension of the action time of this immune response (innate immune response memory) and consequently in protection against other infections (heterologous immunity) for a longer time. C_LIO_LIThe MMR vaccine has been used by national immunization programs in the world for many years, it is very safe and can be stored and distributed at 2-8{degrees}C, making it particularly suitable for global distribution. C_LIO_LIAmong participants who received at least one dose, compared with those in the placebo group, participants in the MMR group had a significant risk reduction in symptomatic COVID-19 and of cases requiring treatment. C_LIO_LIThe use of MMR vaccine can be useful in several populations in the world that do not have access to the COVID-19 vaccine and in a future epidemic or pandemic as an emergency measure until specific treatments or vaccines for each case are available to the general population. C_LI
Matching journals
The top 3 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- A randomized, double-blind phase I clinical trial of two recombinant dimeric RBD COVID-19 vaccine candidates: safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity 97%
- Efficacy and Safety of an Inactivated Whole-Virion SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine (CoronaVac) in Brazilian Healthcare Professionals: The PROFISCOV Trial 97%
- SARS-CoV-2-antibody response in health care workers after vaccination or natural infection in a longitudinal observational study 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Persistent health issues, adverse events of significant concern, and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination- findings from a real-world cohort study of healthcare workers in north India 97%
- Safety and immunogenicity of the BBIBP-CorV vaccine in adolescents aged 12-17 years in Thai population, prospective cohort study 97%
- Systemic adverse effects induced by the BNT162b2 vaccine are associated with higher antibody titers from 3 to 6 months after vaccination 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Immunogenicity and reactogenicity of a third dose of BNT162b2 vaccine for COVID-19 after a primary regimen with BBIBP-CorV or BNT162b2 vaccines in Lima, Peru 96%
- Immunogenicity and safety of Quadrivalent Influenza HA vaccine compared with Trivalent Influenza HA vaccine and evaluation of Quadrivalent Influenza HA vaccine batch-to-batch consistency in Indonesian children and adults 96%
- Immunogenicity and safety of a recombinant adenovirus type-5 COVID-19 vaccine in adults: data from a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose, phase 3 trial in Russia 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Bivalent BNT162b2mRNA original/Omicron BA.4-5 booster vaccination: adverse reactions and inability to work compared to the monovalent COVID-19 booster 96%
- One-dose ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 Vaccine Effectiveness Against Symptomatic COVID-19 in a vulnerable community in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil: test-negative design study 95%
- Antibody responses to BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in 2,015 healthcare workers in a single tertiary referral hospital in Japan 95%
Similar papers in this journal
- Cellular and humoral immune response to a third dose of BNT162b2 COVID-19 vaccine – a prospective observational study 96%
- Safety and immunogenicity of GamEvac-Combi, a heterologous rVSV- and rAd5-vectored Ebola vaccine: a randomized controlled multicenter clinical trial in the Republic of Guinea and Russia 96%
- Predictors for Reactogenicity and Humoral Immunity to SARS-CoV-2 Following Infection and mRNA Vaccination: A Regularized Mixed-Effects Modelling Approach 95%
"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.