International Journal of Clinical Case Reports 2024, Vol.14, No.3, 117-131 http://medscipublisher.com/index.php/ijccr 122 several days (Watanabe et al., 2023). These findings indicate that mRNA vaccines are generally safe in special populations, although additional doses or tailored vaccination strategies may be necessary for optimal protection. 5 Comparative Analysis 5.1 mRNA vaccines vs. traditional vaccines mRNA vaccines, such as those developed for COVID-19, represent a novel approach compared to traditional vaccines like inactivated or live attenuated vaccines. Traditional vaccines, such as the inactivated hepatitis A vaccine (HA-I) and live attenuated hepatitis A vaccine (HA-L), have been shown to provide robust immunogenicity and safety profiles in various populations. For instance, a study comparing HA-I and HA-L in Chinese children demonstrated high seroconversion rates and acceptable safety profiles for both vaccines, with HA-I showing slightly higher geometric mean concentrations of antibodies after a booster dose (Ma et al., 2016). Similarly, inactivated influenza vaccines have been shown to provide broad protection against circulating influenza viruses with minimal adverse reactions (Wang et al., 2021). In contrast, mRNA vaccines have shown a higher efficacy in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to traditional vaccines. A systematic study and meta-analysis indicated that mRNA vaccines conferred a significantly lower risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to viral vector and inactivated vaccines (Fan et al., 2021). However, mRNA vaccines were also associated with a higher incidence of certain adverse events, such as serious vessel disorders, compared to traditional vaccines (Fan et al., 2021). Despite these differences, both mRNA and traditional vaccines have demonstrated the ability to induce strong immune responses and provide protection against their respective target pathogens. 5.2 Comparison with other COVID-19 vaccines When comparing mRNA vaccines to other COVID-19 vaccines, such as inactivated and viral vector vaccines, several key differences emerge. Inactivated vaccines like CoronaVac and BBIBP-CorV have shown good safety profiles and moderate efficacy in preventing symptomatic COVID-19. For example, the CoronaVac vaccine demonstrated an efficacy of 83.5% in preventing PCR-confirmed symptomatic COVID-19 in a phase 3 trial in Turkey, with a good safety profile (Tanriover et al., 2021). Similarly, the BBIBP-CorV vaccine was found to be safe and well-tolerated, inducing strong humoral responses in both younger and older adults (Xia et al., 2020; Wu et al., 2021). However, mRNA vaccines, such as BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, have shown higher efficacy rates in preventing COVID-19 infection and severe outcomes. A comparative study found that mRNA vaccines elicited higher antibody and neutralization titers compared to the Ad26.COV2.S viral vector vaccine, and were more effective in preventing infection, hospitalization, and death (Naranbhai et al., 2021). Additionally, a meta-analysis reported that mRNA vaccines had an efficacy of 85% in participants aged 18 years and older, compared to 73% for adenovirus vector vaccines (Sharif et al., 2021). These findings highlight the superior efficacy of mRNA vaccines in the context of COVID-19, although the safety profiles of different vaccine platforms remain an important consideration. 5.3 Advantages and disadvantages mRNA vaccines offer several advantages over traditional and other COVID-19 vaccines. One of the primary advantages is their high efficacy in preventing SARS-CoV-2 infection and severe disease outcomes. Studies have shown that mRNA vaccines, such as BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273, provide robust immune responses and high levels of protection against COVID-19 (Naranbhai et al., 2021; Sharif et al., 2021). Additionally, mRNA vaccines can be rapidly developed and manufactured, allowing for a swift response to emerging infectious diseases (Alberer et al., 2017).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjQ4ODYzNQ==