27
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Vaccine-associated complications: a comparative multicenter evaluation among dental practitioners and dental students—which candidate vaccine is more safe in SARS COV II, Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca), BBV152 (Covaxin), or BBIBP-CorV(Sinopharm)?

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          The rapidly developed vaccines against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 carry a risk of provoking side effects. This study aimed to evaluate current vaccination non-serious/serious side effects.

          Methods

          A multicenter electronic questionnaire via an online platform was conducted over a 1-week period among vaccinated dental staff and dental students inquiring whether they experienced vaccine-related side-effects after vaccine administration.

          Results

          A total of 1205 respondents with a mean age of 39 (SD: 12) were retained for the analyses. The following vaccines were reported; Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (AstraZeneca), BBV152 (Covaxin), or BBIBP-CorV (Sinopharm). The majority of respondents received ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 (51.1%) and Gam-COVID-Vac (37.6%). The symptoms most frequently reported after vaccination were fatigue (79%), local pain in the injection site (77.4%), malaise (73%), and body pain (71.1%). Enrollees reported more onset of reactions on 0–12 h (44.1%) and 12–24 h (29.0%) after vaccine administration ( p value <0.001). In 75.7%, the side effects last for up to 3 days. Merely 5.5% of cases reported the presence of side effects after the first week. Individuals with a history of SARSCoV-2 and other infections (MERS, influenza, and EBV) were more likely to report a number of unserious systemic side effects.

          Conclusion

          The commonly reported adverse events were in line with similar studies. We have concerns with the frequency of serious adverse effects. This work necessitates the need for further clinical assessments with larger sample sizes.

          Supplementary Information

          The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40902-021-00330-6.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

          Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; p interaction =0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. Funding UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D’Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found

            The continuing 2019-nCoV epidemic threat of novel coronaviruses to global health — The latest 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China

            The city of Wuhan in China is the focus of global attention due to an outbreak of a febrile respiratory illness due to a coronavirus 2019-nCoV. In December 2019, there was an outbreak of pneumonia of unknown cause in Wuhan, Hubei province in China, with an epidemiological link to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market where there was also sale of live animals. Notification of the WHO on 31 Dec 2019 by the Chinese Health Authorities has prompted health authorities in Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan to step up border surveillance, and generated concern and fears that it could mark the emergence of a novel and serious threat to public health (WHO, 2020a, Parr, 2020). The Chinese health authorities have taken prompt public health measures including intensive surveillance, epidemiological investigations, and closure of the market on 1 Jan 2020. SARS-CoV, MERS-CoV, avian influenza, influenza and other common respiratory viruses were ruled out. The Chinese scientists were able to isolate a 2019-nCoV from a patient within a short time on 7 Jan 2020 and perform genome sequencing of the 2019-nCoV. The genetic sequence of the 2019-nCoV has become available to the WHO on 12 Jan 2020 and this has facilitated the laboratories in different countries to produce specific diagnostic PCR tests for detecting the novel infection (WHO, 2020b). The 2019-nCoV is a β CoV of group 2B with at least 70% similarity in genetic sequence to SARS-CoV and has been named 2019-nCoV by the WHO. SARS is a zoonosis caused by SARS-CoV, which first emerged in China in 2002 before spreading to 29 countries/regions in 2003 through a travel-related global outbreak with 8,098 cases with a case fatality rate of 9.6%. Nosocomial transmission of SARS-CoV was common while the primary reservoir was putatively bats, although unproven as the actual source and the intermediary source was civet cats in the wet markets in Guangdong (Hui and Zumla, 2019). MERS is a novel lethal zoonotic disease of humans endemic to the Middle East, caused by MERS-CoV. Humans are thought to acquire MERS-CoV infection though contact with camels or camel products with a case fatality rate close to 35% while nosocomial transmission is also a hallmark (Azhar et al., 2019). The recent outbreak of clusters of viral pneumonia due to a 2019-nCoV in the Wuhan market poses significant threats to international health and may be related to sale of bush meat derived from wild or captive sources at the seafood market. As of 10 Jan 2020, 41 patients have been diagnosed to have infection by the 2019-nCoV animals. The onset of illness of the 41 cases ranges from 8 December 2019 to 2 January 2020. Symptoms include fever (>90% cases), malaise, dry cough (80%), shortness of breath (20%) and respiratory distress (15%). The vital signs were stable in most of the cases while leucopenia and lymphopenia were common. Among the 41 cases, six patients have been discharged, seven patients are in critical care and one died, while the remaining patients are in stable condition. The fatal case involved a 61 year-old man with an abdominal tumour and cirrhosis who was admitted to a hospital due to respiratory failure and severe pneumonia. The diagnoses included severe pneumonia, acute respiratory distress syndrome, septic shock and multi-organ failure. The 2019-nCoV infection in Wuhan appears clinically milder than SARS or MERS overall in terms of severity, case fatality rate and transmissibility, which increases the risk of cases remaining undetected. There is currently no clear evidence of human to human transmission. At present, 739 close contacts including 419 healthcare workers are being quarantined and monitored for any development of symptoms (WHO, 2020b, Center for Health Protection and HKSAR, 2020). No new cases have been detected in Wuhan since 3 January 2020. However the first case outside China was reported on 13th January 2020 in a Chinese tourist in Thailand with no epidemiological linkage to the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market. The Chinese Health Authorities have carried out very appropriate and prompt response measures including active case finding, and retrospective investigations of the current cluster of patients which have been completed; The Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market has been temporarily closed to carry out investigation, environmental sanitation and disinfection; Public risk communication activities have been carried out to improve public awareness and adoption of self-protection measures. Technical guidance on novel coronavirus has been developed and will continue to be updated as additional information becomes available. However, many questions about the new coronavirus remain. While it appears to be transmitted to humans via animals, the specific animals and other reservoirs need to be identified, the transmission route, the incubation period and characteristics of the susceptible population and survival rates. At present, there is however very limited clinical information of the 2019-nCoV infection and data are missing in regard to the age range, animal source of the virus, incubation period, epidemic curve, viral kinetics, transmission route, pathogenesis, autopsy findings and any treatment response to antivirals among the severe cases. Once there is any clue to the source of animals being responsible for this outbreak, global public health authorities should examine the trading route and source of movement of animals or products taken from the wild or captive conditions from other parts to Wuhan and consider appropriate trading restrictions or other control measures to limit. The rapid identification and containment of a novel coronavirus virus in a short period of time is a re-assuring and a commendable achievement by China’s public health authorities and reflects the increasing global capacity to detect, identify, define and contain new outbreaks. The latest analysis show that the Wuhan CoV cluster with the SARS CoV.10 (Novel coronavirus - China (01): (HU) WHO, phylogenetic tree Archive Number: 20200112.6885385). This outbreak brings back memories of the novel coronavirus outbreak in China, the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in China in 2003, caused by a novel SARS-CoV-coronavirus (World Health Organization, 2019a). SARS-CoV rapidly spread from southern China in 2003 and infected more than 3000 people, killing 774 by 2004, and then disappeared – never to be seen again. However, The Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) Coronavirus (MERS-CoV) (World Health Organization, 2019b), a lethal zoonotic pathogen that was first identified in humans in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) in 2012 continues to emerge and re-emerge through intermittent sporadic cases, community clusters and nosocomial outbreaks. Between 2012 and December 2019, a total of 2465 laboratory-confirmed cases of MERS-CoV infection, including 850 deaths (34.4% mortality) were reported from 27 countries to WHO, the majority of which were reported by KSA (2073 cases, 772 deaths. Whilst several important aspects of MERS-CoV epidemiology, virology, mode of transmission, pathogenesis, diagnosis, clinical features, have been defined, there remain many unanswered questions, including source, transmission and epidemic potential. The Wuhan outbreak is a stark reminder of the continuing threat of zoonotic diseases to global health security. More significant and better targeted investments are required for a more concerted and collaborative global effort, learning from experiences from all geographical regions, through a ‘ONE-HUMAN-ENIVRONMENTAL-ANIMAL-HEALTH’ global consortium to reduce the global threat of zoonotic diseases (Zumla et al., 2016). Sharing experience and learning from all geographical regions and across disciplines will be key to sustaining and further developing the progress being made. Author declarations All authors have a specialist interest in emerging and re-emerging pathogens. FN, RK, OD, GI, TDMc, CD and AZ are members of the Pan-African Network on Emerging and Re-emerging Infections (PANDORA-ID-NET) funded by the European and Developing Countries Clinical Trials Partnership the EU Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. AZ is a National Institutes of Health Research senior investigator. All authors declare no conflicts of interest.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Safety and efficacy of an rAd26 and rAd5 vector-based heterologous prime-boost COVID-19 vaccine: an interim analysis of a randomised controlled phase 3 trial in Russia

              Background A heterologous recombinant adenovirus (rAd)-based vaccine, Gam-COVID-Vac (Sputnik V), showed a good safety profile and induced strong humoral and cellular immune responses in participants in phase 1/2 clinical trials. Here, we report preliminary results on the efficacy and safety of Gam-COVID-Vac from the interim analysis of this phase 3 trial. Methods We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial at 25 hospitals and polyclinics in Moscow, Russia. We included participants aged at least 18 years, with negative SARS-CoV-2 PCR and IgG and IgM tests, no infectious diseases in the 14 days before enrolment, and no other vaccinations in the 30 days before enrolment. Participants were randomly assigned (3:1) to receive vaccine or placebo, with stratification by age group. Investigators, participants, and all study staff were masked to group assignment. The vaccine was administered (0·5 mL/dose) intramuscularly in a prime-boost regimen: a 21-day interval between the first dose (rAd26) and the second dose (rAd5), both vectors carrying the gene for the full-length SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein S. The primary outcome was the proportion of participants with PCR-confirmed COVID-19 from day 21 after receiving the first dose. All analyses excluded participants with protocol violations: the primary outcome was assessed in participants who had received two doses of vaccine or placebo, serious adverse events were assessed in all participants who had received at least one dose at the time of database lock, and rare adverse events were assessed in all participants who had received two doses and for whom all available data were verified in the case report form at the time of database lock. The trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04530396). Findings Between Sept 7 and Nov 24, 2020, 21 977 adults were randomly assigned to the vaccine group (n=16 501) or the placebo group (n=5476). 19 866 received two doses of vaccine or placebo and were included in the primary outcome analysis. From 21 days after the first dose of vaccine (the day of dose 2), 16 (0·1%) of 14 964 participants in the vaccine group and 62 (1·3%) of 4902 in the placebo group were confirmed to have COVID-19; vaccine efficacy was 91·6% (95% CI 85·6–95·2). Most reported adverse events were grade 1 (7485 [94·0%] of 7966 total events). 45 (0·3%) of 16 427 participants in the vaccine group and 23 (0·4%) of 5435 participants in the placebo group had serious adverse events; none were considered associated with vaccination, with confirmation from the independent data monitoring committee. Four deaths were reported during the study (three [<0·1%] of 16 427 participants in the vaccine group and one [<0·1%] of 5435 participants in the placebo group), none of which were considered related to the vaccine. Interpretation This interim analysis of the phase 3 trial of Gam-COVID-Vac showed 91·6% efficacy against COVID-19 and was well tolerated in a large cohort. Funding Moscow City Health Department, Russian Direct Investment Fund, Sberbank, and RUSAL.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                https://www.maxillogram.com
                DR.hamidrezafallahi@gmail.com , https://www.maxillogram.com
                shaqayeq.ramezanzade@gmail.com , https://www.maxillogram.com
                Journal
                Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg
                Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg
                Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
                Springer Singapore (Singapore )
                2288-8101
                2288-8586
                13 January 2022
                13 January 2022
                December 2022
                : 44
                : 1
                : 3
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.411600.2, School of Dentistry, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, ; Tehran, Iran
                [2 ]GRID grid.15276.37, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 8091, College of Medicine, , University of Florida, ; Jacksonville, Florida USA
                [3 ]Maxillofacial Surgery Implantology & Biomaterial Research Foundation Tehran, Isfahan, Iran
                [4 ]GRID grid.411036.1, ISNI 0000 0001 1498 685X, Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, School of Health, , Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, ; Isfahan, Iran
                [5 ]GRID grid.411036.1, ISNI 0000 0001 1498 685X, Department of Prosthodontics, Dental College, , Isfahan University of Medical Science, ; Isfahan, Iran
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1012-0730
                Article
                330
                10.1186/s40902-021-00330-6
                8755981
                35025010
                c2ed3a2f-3e8e-4681-811e-9d1b26b7525f
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 16 July 2021
                : 27 August 2021
                Categories
                Research
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                vaccine,sars-cov2,side effect
                vaccine, sars-cov2, side effect

                Comments

                Comment on this article