On 2017 Aug 25, Lance Turtle commented:

This review states that it addresses the safety and immunogenicity of three vaccines manufactured in China, two inactivated (one PHK derived, the other Vero cell derived) and the live attenuated JE vaccine SA14-14-2. However, table 2 references Feroldi et al 2012 (PMID: 22777096), which is a study exclusively of the chimeric JE vaccine (Imojev) and does not include live vaccine SA14-14-2.

The references appear to be mislabelled which may account for some of the confusion, e.g. the section entitled “safety of the three vaccines” refers to the same paper by Feroldi et al (using a different number) as a source of data for the inactivated vaccine safety analysis.

Although the discrepancy might be accounted for purely by mis-referencing, table 2 refers to two papers by Feroldi et al, only one of which contains any data on the vaccines under review. Therefore, I suspect that the analysis of data on the live vaccine SA14-14-2 has been contaminated by inclusion of data on another vaccine not specified in the authors’ review strategy. The usefulness of this review is questionable unless these discrepancies can be corrected, and the paper re-referenced (as far as I can see all of the references in the tables are wrong).

On 2017 Aug 25, Lance Turtle commented:

This review states that it addresses the safety and immunogenicity of three vaccines manufactured in China, two inactivated (one PHK derived, the other Vero cell derived) and the live attenuated JE vaccine SA14-14-2. However, table 2 references Feroldi et al 2012 (PMID: 22777096), which is a study exclusively of the chimeric JE vaccine (Imojev) and does not include live vaccine SA14-14-2.

The references appear to be mislabelled which may account for some of the confusion, e.g. the section entitled “safety of the three vaccines” refers to the same paper by Feroldi et al (using a different number) as a source of data for the inactivated vaccine safety analysis.

Although the discrepancy might be accounted for purely by mis-referencing, table 2 refers to two papers by Feroldi et al, only one of which contains any data on the vaccines under review. Therefore, I suspect that the analysis of data on the live vaccine SA14-14-2 has been contaminated by inclusion of data on another vaccine not specified in the authors’ review strategy. The usefulness of this review is questionable unless these discrepancies can be corrected, and the paper re-referenced (as far as I can see all of the references in the tables are wrong).