Dataset Information

Active pharmacovigilance of the seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine produced by Instituto Butantan: A prospective cohort study of five target groups.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Active pharmacovigilance studies are pivotal to better characterize vaccine safety.

Methods

These are multicenter prospective cohort studies to evaluate the safety of the 2017 and 2018 seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines (TIVs) manufactured by Instituto Butantan, by means of active pharmacovigilance practices. Elderly, children, healthcare workers, pregnant women, and women in the puerperium period were invited to participate in the study during the 2017 and 2018 Brazilian national seasonal influenza vaccination campaigns. Following immunization, participants were observed for 30 minutes and they received a participant card to register adverse events information. All safety information registered were checked at a clinical site visit 14 days after immunization and by a telephone contact 42 days after immunization for unsolicited Adverse Events (AE) and Guillain-Barré Syndrome (GBS).

Results

A total of 942 volunteers participated in the two studies: 305 elderly, 109 children, 108 pregnant women, 32 women in the postpartum period, and 388 health workers. Overall, the median number of AR per participant ranged from 1 to 4. The lowest median number of AR per participant was observed among healthcare workers (1 AR per participant) and the highest among pregnant women (4 AR per participant). Overall, local pain (46.6%) was the most frequent solicited local AR. The most frequent systemic ARs were: headache (22.5%) followed by fatigue (16.0%), and malaise (11.0%). The majority of solicited ARs (96%) were mild, Grades 1 or 2), only 3% were Grade 3, and 1% was Grade 4. No serious AEs, including Guillain-Barré Syndrome, were reported up to 42 days postvaccination.

Conclusion

The results from the two studies confirmed that the 2017 and 2018 seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan were safe and that active pharmacovigilance studies should be considered, when it is feasible, as an important initiative to monitor vaccine safety in the post-marketing period.

SUBMITTER: Vanni T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7877614 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Active pharmacovigilance of the seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine produced by Instituto Butantan: A prospective cohort study of five target groups.

Vanni Tazio T Thomé Beatriz da Costa BDC Oliveira Mayra Martho Moura de MMM Gattás Vera Lúcia VL Salomão Maria da Graça MDG Koike Marcelo Eiji ME Lucchesi Maria Beatriz Bastos MBB Braga Patrícia Emília PE Piorelli Roberta de Oliveira RO Viscondi Juliana Yukari Koidara JYK Mondini Gabriella G da Silva Anderson A Espínola Heloísa Maximo HM Santos Joane do Prado JDP Dias de Nóvoa Rocha Samanta Hosokawa SH Weckx Lily Yin LY Menang Olga O Soquet Muriel M Precioso Alexander Roberto AR

PloS one 20210211 2

<h4>Introduction</h4>Active pharmacovigilance studies are pivotal to better characterize vaccine safety.<h4>Methods</h4>These are multicenter prospective cohort studies to evaluate the safety of the 2017 and 2018 seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines (TIVs) manufactured by Instituto Butantan, by means of active pharmacovigilance practices. Elderly, children, healthcare workers, pregnant women, and women in the puerperium period were invited to participate in the study during the 2017 and 2018 Br ...[more]

PMID: 33571237

Similar Datasets

Project description:Annual vaccination is the most effective way to prevent seasonal influenza illness. Instituto Butantan (IB) performed clinical studies with its 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal trivalent influenza vaccines (inactivated split-virion). Prospective cohort studies were carried out to describe the safety and immunogenicity of Instituto Butantan influenza vaccines, in healthy adults and elderly, from 2013 to 2015. Immediately after the informed consent was signed, participants underwent blood collection followed by vaccination. On study days 1, 2 and 3 post-vaccination participants were contacted by the staff to evaluate the occurrence of solicited (local and systemic) and non-solicited adverse reactions. On study day 21 (+7) subjects returned to the clinical site for final safety assessments and blood collection to evaluate post-vaccination immunogenicity. The immunogenicity analyses were performed by means of hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assay. The immunogenicity endpoints were: seroprotection (SPR) and seroconversion (SCR) rates and the geometric mean HI antibody titer ratio (GMTR). The 2013 study was conducted at the Centro de Referência para Imunobiológicos Especiais (CRIE) and at the Centro de Pesquisa Clínica do Instituto da Criança, Hospital das Clínicas da Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de São Paulo while the 2014 and 2015 studies were conducted at CRIE. The vaccine composition followed the WHO recommendation for the Southern hemisphere seasonal influenza vaccine. Forty-seven healthy adults and 13 elderly participated in the 2013 study, 60 healthy adults and 60 elderly in the 2014 study, and 62 healthy adults and 57 elderly in the 2015 study. In the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies, pain was the most frequent local adverse reaction and headache the most frequent systemic adverse reaction. All observed adverse reactions were classified as mild or moderate and none as severe. SPR >70% and SPR >60% were observed in adults and elderly, respectively, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. SCR >40% was observed in adults, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2014 study and SCR >30% was observed in the elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, only in the 2013 and 2014 studies. GMTR >2.5 among adults, for the three vaccine viruses was only observed in the 2013 study and GMTR >2.0 was observed among elderly, for the three vaccine viruses, in the 2013, 2014 and 2015 studies. The 2013, 2014 and 2015 seasonal influenza vaccines produced by Instituto Butantan were safe and immunogenic according to the immunogenicity criteria defined by the European Medicines Agency (EMA).

Project description:BackgroundVaccination is generally considered to be the best primary prevention measure against influenza virus infection. Many countries encourage specific target groups of people to undertake vaccination, often with financial subsidies or a priority list. To understand differential patterns of national target groups for influenza vaccination before, during and after the 2009 influenza pandemic, we reviewed and analyzed the country-specific policies in the corresponding time periods.MethodsInformation on prioritized groups targeted to receive seasonal and pandemic influenza vaccines was derived from a multi-step internet search of official health department websites, press releases, media sources and academic journal articles. We assessed the frequency and consistency of targeting 20 different groups within populations which are associated with age, underlying medical conditions, role or occupations among different countries and vaccines. Information on subsidies provided to specific target groups was also extracted.ResultsWe analyzed target groups for 33 (seasonal 2009 and 2009-10 vaccines), 72 (monovalent pandemic 2009-10 vaccine) and 34 (seasonal 2010 and 2010-11 vaccines) countries. In 2009-10, the elderly, those with chronic illness and health care workers were common targets for the seasonal vaccine. Comparatively, the elderly, care home residents and workers, animal contacts and close contacts were less frequently targeted to receive the pandemic vaccine. Pregnant women, obese persons, essential community workers and health care workers, however, were more commonly targeted. After the pandemic, pregnant women, obese persons, health care and care home workers, and close contacts were more commonly targeted to receive the seasonal vaccine compared to 2009-10, showing continued influence from the pandemic. Many of the countries provided free vaccines, partial subsidies, reimbursements or national health insurance coverage to specific target groups and over one-third of the countries offered universal subsidy regarding the pandemic vaccine. There was also some inconsistency between countries in target groups.ConclusionsDifferences in target groups between countries may reflect variable objectives as well as uncertainties regarding the transmission dynamics, severity and age-specific immunity against influenza viruses before and after vaccination. Clarification on these points is essential to elucidate optimal and object-oriented vaccination strategies.

Project description:Objective: Current evidence on the immunogenicity of influenza vaccination in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is limited. To address this need for additional knowledge, we conducted a study on the immunogenicity of trivalent seasonal influenza vaccine (TIV) in COPD patients.Methods: We recruited patients from respiratory outpatient clinics of three hospitals in Tangshan, Hebei province who had stable confirmed COPD, were less than 80 y old, and reported not having had influenza or receiving TIV during the study season prior to enrollment. Patients who had a history of allergy to any TIV component or were classified as having very severe COPD were excluded from the study. Eligible and consenting participants were given one dose of TIV after obtaining a baseline blood sample. A second blood sample was obtained 5 weeks later. We used hemagglutination inhibition (HI) assays to measure antibody responses. We considered seropositive to be an HI titer ≥1:10. We considered seroprotection to be an HI titer ≥1:40 and seroconversion to be either a change from seronegative to a post-vaccination titer of ≥1:40 or a fourfold rise in antibody titer among baseline seropositive subjects. Each subject was followed for 1 month to assess the frequency and type of adverse events.Results: Eighty-eight subjects completed our study; the median age was 64 y; most (62.5%) had moderately severe COPD; 48.9% of the subjects had comorbid conditions in addition to COPD. Post-vaccination seropositive rates for influenza H1N1, H3N2, and B were all 100%; corresponding seroprotection rates were 96.6%, 93.2%, and 98.9%; seroconversion rates were 81.8%, 87.5%, and 75.0%. There were no statistical differences in seroconversion (P = .10) and seroprotection (P = .30) among the three types of influenza virus. Geometric mean titers (1:) of HI antibodies to H1N1, H3N2, and B were 18.8 (95% CI: 14.0-25.1), 12.2 (95% CI: 9.6-15.4), and 31.8 (95% CI: 26.1-38.8) at baseline, and 267.0 (95% CI: 213.8-333.4), 190.3 (95% CI: 151.7-238.6), and 201.1 (95% CI: 166.5-242.8) after vaccination.Conclusion: The immunogenicity of one dose of influenza vaccine was excellent in COPD patients. Our study supports recommending influenza vaccination for COPD patients to provide protection from influenza and its complications.

Dataset Information

Active pharmacovigilance of the seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine produced by Instituto Butantan: A prospective cohort study of five target groups.

Introduction

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Active pharmacovigilance of the seasonal trivalent influenza vaccine produced by Instituto Butantan: A prospective cohort study of five target groups.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets