↓ Skip to main content

Long-Term Safety Analysis of the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 Corona Virus Vaccine: Results from a Prospective Observational Study in Priority Vaccinated Groups in North India

Overview of attention for article published in Drug Safety, May 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 1,872)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
128 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Long-Term Safety Analysis of the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 Corona Virus Vaccine: Results from a Prospective Observational Study in Priority Vaccinated Groups in North India
Published in
Drug Safety, May 2023
DOI 10.1007/s40264-023-01301-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Upinder Kaur, Zeba Fatima, Kalika Maheshwari, Vikas Sahni, Amol Dehade, Anju KL, Ashish Kumar Yadav, Sangeeta Kansal, Vaibhav Jaisawal, Sankha Shubhra Chakrabarti

Abstract

Various vaccines for protection against COVID-19 were provided emergency approval in late 2020 to early 2021. There is a scarcity of long-term safety data for many of these. The main aim of this study is to provide the one-year safety results of the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19/AZD1222 vaccine and determine the risk factors of adverse events of special interest (AESIs) and persistent AESIs. This was a prospective observational study conducted from February 2021 to April 2022 in a tertiary hospital in North India and its two associated centers. Health care workers, other frontline workers, and the elderly vaccinated with the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine constituted the study population. Individuals were contacted telephonically at pre-decided intervals for one year and health issues of significant concern were recorded. Atypical adverse events developing after a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine were assessed. Regression analysis was conducted to determine risk factors of AESI occurrence and determinants of AESIs persisting for at least one month at the time of final telephonic contact. Of 1650 individuals enrolled, 1520 could be assessed at one-year post-vaccination. COVID-19 occurred in 44.1% of participants. Dengue occurred in 8% of participants. The majority of the AESIs belonged to the MedDRA® SOC of musculoskeletal disorders (3.7% of 1520). Arthropathy (knee joint involvement) was the most common individual AESI (1.7%). Endocrinal disorders such as thyroid abnormalities and metabolic disorders such as newly diagnosed diabetes developed in 0.4% and 0.3% of individuals, respectively. Regression analysis showed females, individuals with a pre-vaccination history of COVID-19, diabetes, hypothyroidism, and arthropathy had 1.78-, 1.55-, 1.82-, 2.47- and 3.9-times higher odds of AESI development. Females and individuals with hypothyroidism were at 1.66- and 2.23-times higher risk of persistent AESIs. Individuals receiving the vaccine after COVID-19 were at 2.85- and 1.94 times higher risk of persistent AESIs compared, respectively, to individuals with no history of COVID-19 and individuals developing COVID-19 after the vaccine. Among participants receiving a booster dose of the COVID-19 vaccine (n = 185), 9.7% developed atypical adverse events of which urticaria and new-onset arthropathy were common. Nearly half of the ChAdOx1-nCoV-19 vaccine recipients developed COVID-19 over one year. Vigilance is warranted for AESIs such as musculoskeletal disorders. Females, individuals with hypothyroidism, diabetes, and pre-vaccination history of COVID-19 are at higher risk of adverse events. Vaccines received after natural SARS-CoV-2 infection may increase the risk of persistence of adverse events. Sex and endocrinal differences and timing of the COVID-19 vaccine with respect to natural infection should be explored as determinants of AESIs in the future. Pathogenetic mechanisms of vaccine-related adverse events should be investigated along with comparisons with an unvaccinated arm to delineate the overall safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 128 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 25 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Professor > Associate Professor 2 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 5 20%
Unknown 13 52%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 4 16%
Engineering 2 8%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 8%
Chemical Engineering 1 4%
Unspecified 1 4%
Other 2 8%
Unknown 13 52%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 91. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 April 2024.
All research outputs
#474,761
of 25,750,437 outputs
Outputs from Drug Safety
#31
of 1,872 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,676
of 410,217 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Safety
#2
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,750,437 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,872 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 410,217 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.