Turn on cookies to sign in
Signing in saves your progress to your Curie account. We can only do that with cookies on — turn them on to continue.
Two RSV prevention strategies — a monoclonal antibody given to newborns and a vaccine given to pregnant mothers — offer virtually identical protection for infants, a large new study finds. Both cut RSV infections by over 65% and hospitalizations by over 70% compared to no protection. The bottom line: parents and doctors can choose either option with confidence.
Two RSV shields, one result
A large retrospective cohort study published in JAMA Network Open found no significant difference in protection between nirsevimab (Beyfortus) — a monoclonal antibody given to newborns — and the maternal RSV vaccine Abrysvo (Pfizer), given to pregnant women at 32–36 weeks' gestation. The study tracked over 15,000 full-term infants born within the Kaiser Permanente Northern California system across two RSV seasons (2023–2025).
Compared head-to-head, RSV infection rates were nearly identical: 0.94% in the maternal vaccine group vs. 1.04% in the nirsevimab group — a difference that was not statistically significant. Both products dramatically outperformed no protection at all, reducing infections by more than 65% and hospitalizations by more than 70%.
By the Numbers
Why it matters: With two effective RSV prevention tools now available, families and clinicians don't need to agonize over which to choose — both work. The findings reinforce current guidelines recommending that all infants receive one form of RSV protection, and give providers flexibility based on patient preference or local availability.
