IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/drugsa/v47y2024i10d10.1007_s40264-024-01458-w.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Safety and Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines During Pregnancy: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Agustín Ciapponi

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS)
    CONICET)

  • Mabel Berrueta

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Fernando J. Argento

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Jamile Ballivian

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Ariel Bardach

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS)
    CONICET)

  • Martin E. Brizuela

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Noelia Castellana

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Daniel Comandé

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Sami Gottlieb

    (Department of Sexual and Reproductive Health and Research World Health Organization)

  • Beate Kampmann

    (London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine
    Charité, Universitätsmedizin, Vaccine Centre)

  • Agustina Mazzoni

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Edward P. K. Parker

    (London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine)

  • Juan M. Sambade

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Katharina Stegelmann

    (Institute for Clinical Effectiveness and Health Policy (IECS))

  • Xu Xiong

    (Tulane University)

  • Andy Stergachis

    (University of Washington)

  • Pierre Buekens

    (Tulane University)

Abstract

Background Pregnant persons are susceptible to significant complications following COVID-19, even death. However, worldwide COVID-19 vaccination coverage during pregnancy remains suboptimal. Objective This study assessed the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines administered to pregnant persons and shared this evidence via an interactive online website. Methods We followed Cochrane methods to conduct this living systematic review. We included studies assessing the effects of COVID-19 vaccines in pregnant persons. We conducted searches every other week for studies until October 2023, without restrictions on language or publication status, in ten databases, guidelines, preprint servers, and COVID-19 websites. The reference lists of eligible studies were hand searched to identify additional relevant studies. Pairs of review authors independently selected eligible studies using the web-based software COVIDENCE. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were performed independently by pairs of authors. Disagreements were resolved by consensus. We performed random-effects meta-analyses of adjusted relative effects for relevant confounders of comparative studies and proportional meta-analyses to summarize frequencies from one-sample studies using R statistical software. We present the GRADE certainty of evidence from comparative studies. Findings are available on an interactive living systematic review webpage, including an updated evidence map and real-time meta-analyses customizable by subgroups and filters. Results We included 177 studies involving 638,791 participants from 41 countries. Among the 11 types of COVID-19 vaccines identified, the most frequently used platforms were mRNA (154 studies), viral vector (51), and inactivated virus vaccines (17). Low to very low-certainty evidence suggests that vaccination may result in minimal to no important differences compared to no vaccination in all assessed maternal and infant safety outcomes from 26 fewer to 17 more events per 1000 pregnant persons, and 13 fewer to 9 more events per 1000 neonates, respectively. We found statistically significant reductions in emergency cesarean deliveries (9%) with mRNA vaccines, and in stillbirth (75–83%) with mRNA/viral vector vaccines. Low to very low-certainty evidence suggests that vaccination during pregnancy with mRNA vaccines may reduce severe cases or hospitalizations in pregnant persons with COVID-19 (72%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 42–86), symptomatic COVID-19 (78%; 95% CI 21–94), and virologically confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (82%; 95% CI 39–95). Reductions were lower with other vaccine types and during Omicron variant dominance than Alpha and Delta dominance. Infants also presented with fewer severe cases or hospitalizations due to COVID-19 and laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection (64%; 95% CI 37–80 and 66%; 95% CI 37–81, respectively). Conclusions We found a large body of evidence supporting the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy. While the certainty of evidence is not high, it stands as the most reliable option available, given the current absence of pregnant individuals in clinical trials. Results are shared in near real time in an accessible and interactive format for scientists, decision makers, clinicians, and the general public. This living systematic review highlights the relevance of continuous vaccine safety and effectiveness monitoring, particularly in at-risk populations for COVID-19 impact such as pregnant persons, during the introduction of new vaccines. Clinical Trial Registration PROSPERO: CRD42021281290.

Suggested Citation

  • Agustín Ciapponi & Mabel Berrueta & Fernando J. Argento & Jamile Ballivian & Ariel Bardach & Martin E. Brizuela & Noelia Castellana & Daniel Comandé & Sami Gottlieb & Beate Kampmann & Agustina Mazzoni, 2024. "Safety and Effectiveness of COVID-19 Vaccines During Pregnancy: A Living Systematic Review and Meta-analysis," Drug Safety, Springer, vol. 47(10), pages 991-1010, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:47:y:2024:i:10:d:10.1007_s40264-024-01458-w
    DOI: 10.1007/s40264-024-01458-w
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40264-024-01458-w
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40264-024-01458-w?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:drugsa:v:47:y:2024:i:10:d:10.1007_s40264-024-01458-w. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/40264 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.