COVID-19 Vaccines Safety Tracking (CoVaST): Protocol of a Multi-Center Prospective Cohort Study for Active Surveillance of COVID-19 Vaccines' Side Effects.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccine-related side effects have a determinant role in the public decision regarding vaccination. Therefore, this study has been designed to actively monitor the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines globally.Methods
A multi-country, three-phase study including a cross-sectional survey to test for the short-term side effects of COVID-19 vaccines among target population groups. In the second phase, we will monitor the booster doses' side effects, while in the third phase, the long-term safety and effectiveness will be investigated. A validated, self-administered questionnaire will be used to collect data from the target population; Results: The study protocol has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, with the identifier NCT04834869.Conclusions
CoVaST is the first independent study aiming to monitor the side effects of COVID-19 vaccines following booster doses, and the long-term safety and effectiveness of said vaccines.
SUBMITTER: Riad A
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8345554 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:This study is aimed to identify the adverse effects associated with three types of coronavirus disease 2019 vaccines. Approximately 1736 individuals agreed to participate in this study. The participants involved in the study were individuals who had received the first dose or full course (two doses) of the vaccine at least 30 days before the survey. A direct and interactive web-based system interview with a paper and electronic version of the questionnaire was used for all participants. A total of 1736 randomized individuals were identified. The reactogenicity of the vaccines including pain, redness, urticaria, and swelling at the site of the injection was reported in 34.56% of the participants. Local site reaction was reported in more individuals who had Pfizer and AstraZeneca vaccines than those who received the Sinopharm vaccine. The systemic events were more common with AstraZeneca and Pfizer vaccines, symptoms reported were fatigue, body pain, headache, muscle pain, fever, and gastrointestinal side effects. There were no correlations between age or gender, and the duration of the adverse effects for the three vaccines. Swelling and severe allergic reaction of the eyelids, severe hypotension, generalized body aches, shortness of breath, weakness and numbness on the injected arm, acute hyperglycemia, severe chest pain, and fever more than 39°C were among the unusual signs and symptoms reported by the participants. Pfizer, AstraZeneca, and Sinopharm vaccines were found to be safe and Sinopharm vaccine showed a lower prevalence of adverse effects compared with the other vaccines. The duration and severity of adverse effects were not affected by age or gender. Unusual side effects should be closely monitored to establish determine they are linked to the immunization.
| S-EPMC8426829 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Given that vaccine-induced adverse effects were mostly based on previous laboratory research and clinical trials, real-world data on the safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination were lacking. This study reported the adverse events (AEs) among inactivated COVID-19 vaccine recipients. Data were collected from a total of 2,808 hospital employees and their family members in Wuhan, China, with all of them receiving the first dose of inactivated COVID-19 vaccines from two pharmaceutical companies. The first dose was given between 29th April and 13th May 2021. A total of 2,732 vaccinees received the second dose between 27th May and 8th July 2021. The whole process of receiving the vaccine was monitored by clinical pharmacists, and the information on AEs including demographics, occurrence, types, and severity was recorded through an online questionnaire and telephone follow-up. Most of the common AEs were mild and tolerable, and the overall incidence of AEs was lower than the data from the safety profile in clinical trials. Moreover, the incidence of AEs in the first dose (21.30%, 598) was higher than that in the second dose (16.07%, 439). Furthermore, the first injection had more severe AEs (4, 0.14%) than the second injection (2, 0.07%). The AEs involved the skin, muscle, respiratory tract, gastrointestinal tract, cardiovascular system, and other tissues and systems. The most common AE was pain at the injection site (first dose: 10.19%, second dose: 12.55%). All the vaccinees with AEs for both doses recovered fully in the end. It was noted that some AEs might cause blood coagulation disorder and bleeding risk. Therefore, ongoing monitoring of AEs after COVID-19 vaccination is essential in evaluating the benefits and risks of each vaccine.
| S-EPMC9483089 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 vaccines have been instrumental tools in reducing the impact of SARS-CoV-2 infections around the world by preventing 80% to 90% of hospitalizations and deaths from reinfection, in addition to preventing 40% to 65% of symptomatic illnesses. However, the simultaneous large-scale vaccination of the global population will indubitably unveil heterogeneity in immune responses as well as in the propensity to developing post-vaccine adverse events, especially in vulnerable individuals. Herein, we applied a systems biology workflow, integrating vaccine transcriptional signatures with chemogenomics, to study the pharmacological effects of mRNA vaccines. First, we derived transcriptional signatures and predicted their biological effects using pathway enrichment and network approaches. Second, we queried the Connectivity Map (CMap) to prioritize adverse events hypotheses. Finally, we accepted higher-confidence hypotheses that have been predicted by independent approaches. Our results reveal that the mRNA-based BNT162b2 vaccine affects immune response pathways related to interferon and cytokine signaling, which should lead to vaccine success, but may also result in some adverse events. Our results emphasize the effects of BNT162b2 on calcium homeostasis, which could be contributing to some frequently encountered adverse events related to mRNA vaccines. Notably, cardiac side effects were signaled in the CMap query results. In summary, our approach has identified mechanisms underlying both the expected protective effects of vaccination as well as possible post-vaccine adverse effects. Our study illustrates the power of systems biology approaches in improving our understanding of the comprehensive biological response to vaccination against COVID-19.
| S-EPMC9320269 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveOne of the primary reasons for hesitancy in taking COVID-19 vaccines is the fear of side effects. This study primarily aimed to inspect the potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines circulated in Bangladesh.Design and Settings.The study was based on a cross-sectional anonymous online survey conducted in December 2021 across Bangladesh.Participants.The study included consenting Bangladeshi individuals aged 12 and above who had received at least one dose of the COVID-19 vaccines.Main Outcome.Analyses were carried out through exploratory analysis, Chi-square test, and logistic regression to investigate potential side effects of the COVID-19 vaccines.ResultsA total of 1,180 vaccinated people participated in the study. Only 39.48% of the participants reported at least one side effect after receiving their COVID-19 vaccine. Injection-site pain, fever, headache, redness/swelling at the injection site, and lethargy were the most commonly reported adverse effects, all of which were mild and lasted 1-3 days. Side effects were most prevalent (about 80%) among individuals who received Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna vaccines and were least common among those who received Sinopharm and Sinovac vaccines (21%-28%). When compared to the Sinopharm vaccines, the OxfordAstraZeneca, Pfizer-BioNTech, and Moderna vaccines were 4.51 times (95% CI: 2.53-8.04), 5.37 times (95% CI: 2.57-11.22), and 4.28 times (95% CI: 2.28-8.05) likelier to produce side effects. Furthermore, males, those over 50 years old, urban dwellers, smokers, and those with underlying health issues had a considerably increased risk of developing side effects. A lack of confidence in vaccines' efficacy and a substantial level of hesitancy in allowing children (age five years or over) and older people (70 years or over) to receive COVID-19 vaccines were also observed.ConclusionSide effects of COVID-19 vaccines are minimal, demonstrating their safety. Efforts should be made to disseminate such findings worldwide to increase vaccine uptake.
| S-EPMC9394094 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The assessment of the efficacy and safety of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines in actual practice is extremely important, and monitoring efforts are being implemented worldwide. In Japan, a joint council in the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare is held every two to three weeks to summarise information on the adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination, with careful assessment of individual case safety reports and comparison with background incidence rates. In 2021, the joint council mainly reviewed anaphylaxis, death, myocarditis/pericarditis, and thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome. These activities resulted in several safety-related regulatory actions, including the revision of vaccine package inserts with warnings about myocarditis/pericarditis. International sharing of vaccine safety information, as well as details of the evaluation systems, is important for international discussion and decision-making on better safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines.
| S-EPMC8960038 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSurveillance for adverse events following immunization is an important component of any national immunization programme because it is critical to assessing the safety of vaccines and to detecting potentially rare and severe adverse events and responding in a timely manner. We conducted an enhanced active surveillance aimed at assessing the safety of flu vaccines in the 2015-2016 season in Italy. The study was targeted to the population groups for which the seasonal vaccine is recommended in Italy.MethodsDuring the study period, a total of 3213 individuals receiving seasonal influenza vaccination were registered on the web-based platform. Any adverse events experienced after 7 days from vaccination by individuals aged six months or more were collected through a telephone interview or by a web-based self-administered questionnaire. All individuals experiencing at least one event during the 7 days of follow-up were contacted for follow-up to 60 days.ResultsOverall, 854 events were reported: 845 events (26%) after administration of the first dose and 9 (12%) after the second dose. The majority of adverse events reported after 7 days from the first dose were of little clinical importance, and most involved local symptoms.ConclusionOur data, even though the number of vaccinated individuals was smaller than expected, is consistent with the safety of influenza vaccines in Italy during the 2015-2016 season regarding the most common adverse events. Further efforts are needed to obtain sufficient power to study rarer adverse events. Active monitoring and systematic studies to test generated signals and hypotheses are crucial to intensify awareness among the public and professionals with regard to the safety of vaccines.
| S-EPMC6303938 | biostudies-literature
Project description:COVID-19 Health Surveillance FVG
| PRJEB46661 | ENA
Project description:Hospital-based surveillance for adverse events was conducted on healthcare workers after they received the first dose of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. Among the two new platform vaccines (messenger RNA- and adenoviral vector-based vaccines), the rates of systemic adverse events were significantly higher among adenovirus-vectored vaccine recipients. Fatigue (87.6% vs. 53.8%), myalgia (80.8% vs. 50.0%), headache (72.0% vs. 28.8%), and fever (≥ 38.0°C, 38.7% vs. 0%) were the most common adverse events among adenovirus-vectored vaccine recipients, but most symptoms resolved within 2 days. Both types of COVID-19 vaccines were generally safe, and serious adverse events rarely occurred.
| S-EPMC8055510 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundReal-world data on safety and clinical outcomes of remdesivir in COVID-19 management is scant. We present findings of data analysis conducted for assessing the safety and clinical outcomes of remdesivir treatment for COVID-19 in India.MethodsThis retrospective analysis used data from an active surveillance programme database of hospitalised patients with COVID-19 who were receiving remdesivir.ResultsOf the 2329 patients included, 67.40% were men. Diabetes (29.69%) and hypertension (20.33%) were the most common comorbidities. At remdesivir initiation, 2272 (97.55%) patients were receiving oxygen therapy. Remdesivir was administered for 5 days in 65.38% of patients. Antibiotics (64.90%) and steroids (47.90%) were the most common concomitant medications. Remdesivir was overall well tolerated, and total 119 adverse events were reported; most common were nausea and vomiting in 45.40% and increased liver enzymes in 14.28% patients. 84% of patients were cured/improved, 6.77% died and 9.16% showed no improvement in their clinical status at data collection. Subgroup analyses showed that the mortality rate was significantly lower in patients < 60 years old than in those > 60 years old. Amongst patients on oxygen therapy, the cure/improvement rate was significantly higher in those receiving standard low-flow oxygen than in those receiving mechanical ventilation, non-invasive ventilation, or high-flow oxygen. Factors that were associated with higher mortality were age > 60 years, cardiac disease, diabetes high flow oxygen, non-invasive ventilation and mechanical ventilation.ConclusionOur analysis showed that remdesivir is well tolerated and has an acceptable safety profile. The clinical outcome of cure/improvement was 84%, with a higher improvement in patients < 60 years old and on standard low-flow oxygen.
| S-EPMC8724590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Limitations in laboratory diagnostic capacity and reporting delays have hampered efforts to mitigate and control the ongoing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic globally. To augment traditional lab and hospital-based surveillance, Bangladesh established a participatory surveillance system for the public to self-report symptoms consistent with COVID-19 through multiple channels. Here, we report on the use of this system, which received over 3 million responses within two months, for tracking the COVID-19 outbreak in Bangladesh. Although we observe considerable noise in the data and initial volatility in the use of the different reporting mechanisms, the self-reported syndromic data exhibits a strong association with lab-confirmed cases at a local scale. Moreover, the syndromic data also suggests an earlier spread of the outbreak across Bangladesh than is evident from the confirmed case counts, consistent with predicted spread of the outbreak based on population mobility data. Our results highlight the usefulness of participatory syndromic surveillance for mapping disease burden generally, and particularly during the initial phases of an emerging outbreak.
| S-EPMC8054699 | biostudies-literature