Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34911284›Full record

SynthesisHaematologica2022

Antibody response after vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 in adults with hematological malignancies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nico Gagelmann, Francesco Passamonti, Christine Wolschke, Radwan Massoud, Christian Niederwieser, Raissa Adjallé, Barbara Mora, Francis Ayuk, Nicolaus Kröger

Open access · goldAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Haematologica, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

53 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Vaccination of Adults With Cancer: ASCO Guideline.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2024
    Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nico GagelmannDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg. n.gagelmann@uke.de.
Francesco PassamontiUniversity of Insubria, Varese.
Christine WolschkeDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg.
Radwan MassoudDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg.
Christian NiederwieserDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg.
Raissa AdjalléDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg.
Barbara MoraUniversity of Insubria, Varese.
Francis AyukDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg.
Nicolaus KrögerDepartment of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg.
University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf · DEUniversität Hamburg · DEUniversity of Insubria · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vaccines against SARS-CoV-2 have shown remarkable efficacy and thus constitute an important preventive option against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially in fragile patients. We aimed to systematically analyze the outcomes of patients with hematological malignancies who received vaccination and to identify specific groups with differences in outcomes. The primary end point was antibody response after full vaccination (2 doses of mRNA or one dose of vectorbased vaccines). We identified 49 studies comprising 11,086 individuals. Overall risk of bias was low. The pooled response for hematological malignancies was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 59-69; I²=93%) versus 96% (95% CI: 92-97; I²=44%) for solid cancer and 98% (95% CI: 96-99; I²=55%) for healthy controls (P<0.001). Outcome was different across hematological malignancies (P<0.001). The pooled response was 50% (95% CI: 43-57; I²=84%) for chronic lymphocytic leukemia, 76% (95% CI: 67-83; I²=92%) for multiple myeloma, 83% (95% CI: 69-91; I²=85%) for myeloproliferative neoplasms, 91% (95% CI: 82-96; I²=12%) for Hodgkin lymphoma, and 58% (95% CI: 44-70; I²=84%) for aggressive and 61% (95% CI: 48-72; I²=85%) for indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. The pooled response for allogeneic and autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation was 82% and 83%, respectively. Being in remission and prior COVID-19 showed significantly higher responses. Low pooled response was identified for active treatment (35%), anti-CD20 therapy ≤1 year (15%), Bruton kinase inhibition (23%), venetoclax (26%), ruxolitinib (42%), and chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy (42%). Studies on timing, value of boosters, and long-term efficacy are needed. This study is registered with PROSPERO (clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: CRD42021279051).

Indexed as

COVID-19Hematologic NeoplasmsAdultAntibody FormationCOVID-19 VaccinesHumansSARS-CoV-2VaccinationCOVID-19 Vaccines

Identifiers

PMID34911284
PMCPMC9335098
OpenAlexW4200298142

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.