The DOI matches its Crossref record; 74 of the 74 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Systematic review and meta-analysis of the current evidence on the duration of protection by bacillus Calmette–Guérin vaccination against tuberculosis
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Recent evidence suggests that the duration of protection by bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) may exceed previous estimates with potential implications for estimating clinical and cost-efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the protection and duration of protection provided by BCG vaccination against tuberculosis, explore how this protection changes with time since vaccination, and examine the reasons behind the variation in protection and the rate of waning of protection. DATA SOURCES: Electronic databases including MEDLINE, Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), Cochrane Databases, NHS Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), Web of Knowledge, Biosciences Information Service (BIOSIS), Latin American and Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACs), MEDCARIB Database, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) were searched from inception to May 2009. Index to Theses, System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (SIGLE), Centre for Agricultural Bioscience International (CABI) Abstracts, Scopus, Article First, Academic Complete, Africa-Wide Information, Google Scholar, Global Health, British National Bibliography for Report Literature, and clinical trial registration websites were searched from inception to October 2009. REVIEW METHODS: Electronic databases searches, screening of identified studies, data extraction and analysis were undertaken. Meta-analysis was used to present numerical and graphical summaries of clinical efficacy and efficacy by time since vaccination. Evidence of heterogeneity was assessed using the tau-squared statistic. Meta-regression allowed the investigation of observed heterogeneity. Factors investigated included BCG strain, latitude, stringency of pre-BCG vaccination tuberculin testing, age at vaccination, site of disease, study design and vulnerability to biases. Rate of waning of protection was estimated using the ratio of the measure of efficacy after 10 years compared with the efficacy in the first 10 years of a study. RESULTS: Study selection. A total of 21,030 references were identified, providing data on 132 studies after abstract and full-text review. Efficacy. Protection against pulmonary tuberculosis in adults is variable, ranging from substantial protection in the UK MRC trial {rate ratio 0.22 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.16 to 0.31]}, to absence of clinically important benefit, as in the large Chingleput trial [rate ratio 1.05 (95% CI 0.88 to 1.25)] and greater in latitudes further away from the equator. BCG vaccination efficacy was usually high, and varied little by form of disease (with higher protection against meningeal and miliary tuberculosis) or study design when BCG vaccination was given only to infants or to children after strict screening for tuberculin sensitivity. High levels of protection against death were observed from both trials and observational studies. The observed protective effect of BCG vaccination did not differ by the strain of BCG vaccine used in trials. DURATION: Reviewed studies showed that BCG vaccination protects against pulmonary and extrapulmonary tuberculosis for up to 10 years. Most studies either did not follow up participants for long enough or had very few cases after 15 years. This should not be taken to indicate an absence of effect: five studies (one trial and four observational studies) provided evidence of measurable protection at least 15 years after vaccination. Efficacy declined with time. The rate of decline was variable, with faster decline in latitudes further from the equator and in situations where BCG vaccination was given to tuberculin-sensitive participants after stringent tuberculin testing. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of this review relates to quality of included trials, most of which were conducted before current standards for reporting were formulated. In addition, data were lacking in some areas and the review had to rely on evidence from observational studies. CONCLUSIONS: BCG vaccination protection against tuberculosis varies between populations, to an extent that cannot be attributed to chance alone. Failure to exclude those already sensitised to mycobacteria and study latitude closer to the equator were associated with lower efficacy. These factors explained most of the observed variation. There is good evidence that BCG vaccination protection declines with time and that protection can last for up to 10 years. Data on protection beyond 15 years are limited; however, a small number of trials and observational studies suggest that BCG vaccination may protect for longer. Further studies are required to investigate the duration of protection by BCG vaccination. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Variation in protection by BCG: implications of and for heterologous immunity
Fine, P. E. M. (1995) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(95)92348-9 · Cited by 1,380
Self-citationTrunz, B. B., Fine, P., & Dye, C. (2006) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(06)68507-3 · Cited by 1,114
Self-citationGlobal Tuberculosis Control 2011, WHO Report 2011
Behera, D. (2012) · The Indian Journal of Medical Research · Cited by 1,022
Whole-Genome Sequencing and Social-Network Analysis of a Tuberculosis Outbreak
Gardy, J. L., Johnston, J. C., Sui, S. J. H., Cook, V. J., Shah, L., Brodkin, E., Rempel, S., Moore, R., Zhao, Y., Holt, R., et al. (2011) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1003176 · Cited by 712
Protective Effect of BCG against Tuberculous Meningitis and Miliary Tuberculosis: A Meta-Analysis
RODRIGUES, L. C., DIWAN, V. K., & WHEELER, J. G. (1993) · International Journal of Epidemiology · doi:10.1093/ije/22.6.1154 · Cited by 650
Self-citationThe BCG World Atlas: A Database of Global BCG Vaccination Policies and Practices
Zwerling, A., Behr, M. A., Verma, A., Brewer, T. F., Menzies, D., & Pai, M. (2011) · PLoS Medicine · doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001012 · Cited by 575
Genome plasticity of BCG and impact on vaccine efficacy
Brosch, R., Gordon, S. V., Garnier, T., Eiglmeier, K., Frigui, W., Valenti, P., Dos Santos, S., Duthoy, S., Lacroix, C., Garcia-Pelayo, C., et al. (2007) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0700869104 · Cited by 574
Biomarkers and diagnostics for tuberculosis: progress, needs, and translation into practice
Wallis, R. S., Pai, M., Menzies, D., Doherty, T. M., Walzl, G., Perkins, M. D., & Zumla, A. (2010) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60359-5 · Cited by 453
Efficacy of BCG vaccine in the prevention of tuberculosis. Meta-analysis of the published literature
Colditz, G. A. (1994) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.271.9.698 · Cited by 355
Does the efficacy of BCG decline with time since vaccination?
Sterne, J. A. C., Rodrigues, L. C., & Guedes, I. N. (1998) · PubMed · Cited by 310
Self-citation
Cited by
Pai, M., Behr, M. A., Dowdy, D., Dheda, K., Divangahi, M., Boehme, C. C., Ginsberg, A., Swaminathan, S., Spigelman, M., Getahun, H., et al. (2016) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/nrdp.2016.76 · Cited by 1,270
Factors That Influence the Immune Response to Vaccination
Zimmermann, P., & Curtis, N. (2019) · Clinical Microbiology Reviews · doi:10.1128/cmr.00084-18 · Cited by 939
Walters, S. J., Bonacho dos Anjos Henriques-Cadby, I., Bortolami, O., Flight, L., Hind, D., Jacques, R. M., Knox, C., Nadin, B., Rothwell, J., Surtees, M., et al. (2017) · BMJ Open · doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015276 · Cited by 560
The global burden of tuberculosis mortality in children: a mathematical modelling study
Dodd, P. J., Yuen, C. M., Sismanidis, C., Seddon, J. A., & Jenkins, H. E. (2017) · The Lancet Global Health · doi:10.1016/s2214-109x(17)30289-9 · Cited by 445
Arasaradnam, R. P., Brown, S., Forbes, A., Fox, M. R., Hungin, P., Kelman, L., Major, G., O’Connor, M., Sanders, D. S., Sinha, R., et al. (2018) · Gut · doi:10.1136/gutjnl-2017-315909 · Cited by 332
Metadata
- Authors
- Abubakar, I., Pimpin, L., Ariti, C., Beynon, R., Mangtani, P., Sterne, J., Fine, P., Smith, P., Lipman, M., Elliman, D., Watson, J., Drumright, L., Whiting, P., Vynnycky, E., & Rodrigues, L.
- Venue
- Health Technol Assess
- Published
- 2013-09
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 37
- Pages
- 1-372, v
- ISSN
- 1366-5278 (ISSN-L)
- 2046-4924
- OpenAlex
- W2058969608
- Cited by
- 498
- References
- 74
- FWCI
- 2.94
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- diamond
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Systematic review and meta-analysis of the current evidence on the duration of protection by bacillus Calmette–Guérin vaccination against tuberculosis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3310/hta17370
- The paper
- Abubakar, I., Pimpin, L., Ariti, C., Beynon, R., Mangtani, P., Sterne, J., Fine, P., Smith, P., Lipman, M., Elliman, D., Watson, J., Drumright, L., Whiting, P., Vynnycky, E., & Rodrigues, L. (2013). Systematic review and meta-analysis of the current evidence on the duration of protection by bacillus Calmette–Guérin vaccination against tuberculosis. Health Technol Assess. https://doi.org/10.3310/hta17370
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.