Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ Bezmialem Vakif Univ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
Journal of Medical Virology
Article . 2022 . Peer-reviewed
License: Wiley Online Library User Agreement
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 3 versions
addClaim

The efficacy of BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) and CoronaVac vaccines in patients with cancer

Authors: Melih Simsek; Ayse I. Yasin; Mehmet Besiroglu; Atakan Topcu; Zehra Sucuoglu Isleyen; Mesut Seker; Haci Mehmet Turk;

The efficacy of BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) and CoronaVac vaccines in patients with cancer

Abstract

AbstractAlthough vaccination is efficacious and prevents infection in the general population, there is limited data about Coronavirus disease‐19 (Covid‐19) occurrence after vaccination in cancer patients. It was aimed to evaluate the efficacy of BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) and CoronaVac vaccines against Covid‐19 in patients with cancer. In this single‐center, retrospective, cross‐sectional, and descriptive study, the data of cancer patients referred to the medical oncology clinic of a university hospital were analyzed. The sample of the study consisted of cancer patients who had Covid‐19 or were vaccinated against Covid‐19. A total number of 2578 patients were included in the study. Of the patients, 2000 have never been infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus and 578 patients have had a positive reverse‐transcription polymerase chain reaction (RT‐PCR) for Covid‐19. It was found that 2094 patients (81.2%) were fully vaccinated, and 484 patients (18.8%) did not receive full‐dose vaccination. A statistically significant difference in Covid‐19 occurrence was found between the patients who had full‐dose vaccination or not (p = 0.000). In in‐group comparisons of full‐dose vaccinated patients, while no difference was observed between two doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer–BioNTech) and three doses of CoronaVac (p = 0.432), a statistically significant difference was observed between all other groups (p < 0.005). When the data of 578 patients who experienced Covid‐19 was analyzed, a statistically significant difference was observed between the groups who were full‐dose vaccinated and those who were not (p = 0.000). It is recommended that this vulnerable patient group should be prioritized in vaccination programs, and full‐dose vaccination (at least two doses of vaccines) should be completed as soon as possible.

Country
Turkey
Related Organizations
Keywords

Vaccines, COVID-19 Vaccines, Cross-Sectional Studies, Neoplasms, COVID-19, Humans, BNT162 Vaccine, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    5
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
5
Top 10%
Average
Top 10%
Green