A comparative study between vaccines against Covid-19 in phase III clinical trials/ Um estudo comparativo entre vacinas contra Covid-19 em ensaios clínicos de fase III

• Autor(a) principal: Faria, Carolina Dourado de
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Outros Autores: Neto, Fernando Antônio Ramos Schramm, Machado, Yuri de Jesus, Santos, Rafael Alves dos Santos e, Batista, Luna Brenda Carvalho Abade Moura, Sampaio, Carla Jaqueline Silva, Silva, Rosane Santiago Alves da, Esteves, José Fierre, Souza, Ramon Andrade de, Silva, Roberto de Barros
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por; eng
• Título da fonte: Brazilian Journal of Health Review
• Texto Completo: https://ojs.brazilianjournals.com.br/ojs/index.php/BJHR/article/view/40746
• topic: SARS-CoV-2; Vaccine-Preventable Diseases; Public Health.

Objective: Compare different characteristics of the vaccines against Covid-19 in phase III clinical trials: type of vaccine, storage, route of administration, number of doses, interval between doses, countries tested, age group tested, seroconversion interval, general efficacy, country distribution, estimated number of participants, and pharmacodynamics. Methods: Phase III clinical trials were identified through the ClinicalTrials.gov database. The filters used were: coronavirus infection; vaccines; clinical trials; all studies; recruitment status (all); stage III; 06-06-2020 to 06-06-2021. 182 studies were found. After excluding studies with drug therapies and vaccines not exclusive to Covid-19, there remained 56 studies. Results: Our study compared 28 vaccines in phase III clinical trials. All vaccines with available data on general efficacy achieved values above 50%. More than half of the studies had at least 50,000 participants. The immunizing agents were tested in 37 countries and the predominant age group tested was >=18 years. As for storage 80% of vaccines with available data need to be refrigerated between 2-8 °C, while mRNA type vaccines require lower temperatures.  Regarding types of vaccines, recombinant viral vectors constituted 50%. Within the vaccines approved for distribution, 7.14% were distributed to over 100 countries, in contrast, another 14.29% of the vaccines were distributed to only 1 country each. Conclusion: The analysis and understanding of our results can contribute to disseminate important information so that people do not perceive in a false manner that one vaccine works better than the other, reducing vaccine hesitancy. However, it is up to each nation to compare each immunizer and define the best choice that fits their needs.