Expected Rates of Select Adverse Events following Immunization for COVID-19 Vaccine Safety Monitoring.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Abara WE
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8755334 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Post licensure surveillance of adverse events following immunization (AEFI) is a fundamental activity to improve safety and maintain public confidence in vaccines. Since 2011, the Liguria Region has been involved in the inter-regional project of post-marketing surveillance of AEFI, coordinated by the Italian Medicine Agency and the Veneto region. The main objectives of the project are: (1) to coordinate the surveillance activities in the 8 Italian Regions included in the project; (2) to encourage the signal of AEFI by healthcare workers and patients; (3) to organize education activities addressed to health care workers, and, finally; (4) to establish vaccination counseling services in each Region. In particular, the Ligurian multidisciplinary team, composed by physicians expert in the field of vaccination and pharmacists, is involved in the causality assessment between vaccines and all adverse events signaled within the Liguria Region and in the analysis of all adverse events signaled in Italy as possibly related to influenza vaccines. During 2013, the team has organized 4 courses, addressed to healthcare personnel of vaccination outpatient clinics, focused on European and Italian legislation on pharmaco-vigilance and vaccine-vigilance and aimed at promoting signal of AEFI. Since October 2013, the Liguria Region has been participating to the inter-regional project of active surveillance of adverse events aimed at promoting the signal of AEFI by parents of vaccinated infants. After two years of implementation of the project both the number of reported AEFI and the reporting rate per 100 000 administered doses of vaccine increased. The activities need to be consolidated in the next years in order to guarantee high standard of vaccine safety, maintain the confidence in current immunization programs and reach optimal vaccination coverage rate.
| S-EPMC4514437 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundVaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is underway globally to prevent the infection caused by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2. We aimed to investigate the adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) for COVID-19 among healthcare workers (HCWs).MethodsThis was a retrospective study of the AEFIs associated with the first dose of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine at the Kosin University Gospel Hospital from March 3 to March 22, 2021. We investigated the systemic and local adverse events during the 7 days following the vaccination using the Mobile Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (MVAERS) developed by our hospital.ResultsA total of 1,503 HCWs were vaccinated, and the data of 994 HCWs were reported in the MVAERS. The most commonly reported AEFIs were tenderness at the injection site (94.5%), fatigue (92.9%), pain at the injection site (88.0%), and malaise (83.8%). The severity of most AEFIs was mild-to-moderate, and the severity and number of AEFIs were less in the older age group. There were no serious events requiring hospitalization, and most AEFIs improved within a few days.ConclusionThe AEFIs associated with the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine were tolerable, and the use of the MVAERS was helpful in monitoring the AEFIs. The use of MVAERS will help in sharing accurate and ample information about vaccination against COVID-19.
| S-EPMC8093606 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pakistan is facing the world's largest outbreak of extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Typhoid. Vaccination campaign for children aged 6 months to 10 years old with Typhoid Conjugate Vaccine (Typbar-TCV®) was conducted in high-risk areas of Hyderabad during 2018. About 207,000 children were vaccinated. Here we report the adverse events following immunization (AEFI) during the campaign. The campaign was carried out using outreach and fixed centre strategy. Community mobilizers visited each household to perform line listing and mobilize parents with age-eligible children. Children were observed for 30 min post-vaccination. Two-pronged strategy was used for ascertainment of AEFI. A 24/7 hotline number was provided to all parents/caretakers (n = 199,861) to report AEFI during 14 days following immunization. An age-stratified (n = 7139 children) were actively followed at days 7 and 14 for the ascertainment of AEFI. All AEFI were examined by three trained medical officers. A structured questionnaire using Brighton collaboration criteria with level 3 diagnostic certainty was used for the recording of AEFI. Data were analysed using Microsoft Excel Office 365. Overall, 499 AEFI (433 in the subset actively followed and 66 self-reported through hotline) were observed. The rate of AEFI was significantly higher among very young children (age group 6 to 12 months) as compared to 2 to 3 years old children (0.54% vs. 0.33% respectively; p-value < 0.001). Fever was the most common AEFI self-reported through the hotline (38/199,861 = 0.02%) and among the subset followed actively for 14 days (206/7139 = 2.89%). Fever was followed by local reactogenicity 10/199,861(0.01%), and 134/7139 (1.88%) through self-reported hotline and active follow-up, respectively. No serious AEFI was observed. Administration of a single dose of Typbar-TCV among children aged 6 months to 10 years old during an outbreak setting of Hyderabad Pakistan was safe.
| S-EPMC7166079 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Rotavirus is the most common cause of diarrhea leading to hospitalization in young children. Rotavirus vaccines are available in Canada but have not been introduced in all provinces. In a controlled trial, 2 study sites (Prince Edward Island and the Capital District Health Authority (District 9, Nova Scotia) introduced universal rotavirus vaccine programs for infants at 2 and 4 months of age beginning 1 December 2010, using public health nurse or general practitioner-delivery models, respectively. A third site (Saint John, NB) served as the non-intervention control setting. Vaccine coverage, rotavirus hospitalizations, intussusception and all-cause diarrhea were monitored. A universal rotavirus vaccine program with >90% coverage was associated with reductions in rotavirus-associated hospitalizations (from a peak of 52.8 hospitalizations/100,000 population to 0 hospitalizations) in infants < 12 months and 1 to < 2 y of age 12 months after program implementation. No apparent reduction occurred in the site with vaccine coverage of < 40%, or in the non-intervention control site. No cases of intussusception were associated with vaccine receipt, and no increase in all-cause diarrhea was observed. A universal infant rotavirus vaccine program with high coverage was associated with reductions in rotavirus and no safety signals; no reduction was observed in settings with low vaccine coverage.
| S-EPMC4514393 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionThe rapid rollout of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines for a large proportion of the population necessitates a strong emphasis on safety. Complementary to the existing spontaneous reporting system, The Netherlands Pharmacovigilance Centre Lareb conducted patient-reported cohort event monitoring (CEM).ObjectiveThe primary aim was to investigate differences in the frequencies of any and commonly reported, 'well-known', systemic adverse events following immunization (AEFIs) with four COVID-19 vaccines (Pfizer's Comirnaty®, Moderna's Spikevax®, AstraZeneca's Vaxzevria® and the Janssen vaccine). As a secondary aim, we analyzed the frequencies of well-known systemic adverse events after the first and, if applicable, second COVID-19 vaccinations, taking into account age, sex and prior COVID-19 infection.MethodsPatient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the Netherlands starting in February 2021 were analyzed using a prospective cohort design.ResultsData of 27,554 participants who received one vaccination and 20,682 participants who received complete immunization were analyzed. The percentage of patients reporting any AEFI was high and ranged from approximately 53% for the Pfizer vaccine to approximately 94% for the Moderna vaccine. The frequency of serious AEFIs was low, with the highest frequency found for the AstraZeneca vaccine (0.228%). AEFIs were most often experienced by participants receiving the first dose of the AstraZeneca and Janssen vaccines and the second dose of the Moderna vaccine; the Pfizer vaccine was associated with the lowest rate of AEFIs. Participants with a COVID-19 history before vaccination experienced commonly reported systemic AEFIs more frequently after the first vaccination than after the second vaccination. Women and young people experienced more AEFIs than men and older people, respectively.ConclusionsThe analysis of a large cohort provides important information about the rates of AEFIs across age groups, among brands of vaccines and between those with and without prior COVID-19 infection. Participants reported a high number of AEFIs in general, but the frequency of serious AEFIs was low.
| S-EPMC8936041 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundVaccine hesitancy has been a growing challenge for public health in recent decades. Among factors contributing to vaccine hesitancy, concerns regarding vaccine safety and Adverse Events (AEs) play the leading role. Moreover, cognitive biases are critical in connecting such concerns to vaccine hesitancy behaviors, but their role has not been comprehensively studied. In this study, our first objective is to address concerns regarding vaccine AEs to increase vaccine acceptance. Our second objective is to identify the potential cognitive biases connecting vaccine hesitancy concerns to vaccine-hesitant behaviors and identify the mechanism they get triggered in the vaccine decision-making process.MethodsFirst, to mitigate concerns regarding AEs, we quantitatively analyzed the U.S. Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) from 2011 to 2018 and provided evidence regarding the non-severity of the AEs that can be used as a communicable summary to increase vaccine acceptance. Second, we focused on the vaccination decision-making process. We reviewed cognitive biases and vaccine hesitancy literature to identify the most potential cognitive biases that affect vaccine hesitancy and categorized them adopting the Precaution Adoption Process Model (PAPM).ResultsOur results show that the top frequent AEs are expected mild reactions like injection site erythema (4.29%), pyrexia (3.66%), and injection site swelling (3.21%). 94.5% of the reports are not serious and the average population-based serious reporting rate over the 8 years was 25.3 reports per 1 million population. We also identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect people's vaccination decision-making and nudge them toward vaccine hesitancy. We categorized these biases based on the factors that trigger them and discussed how they contribute to vaccine hesitancy.ConclusionsThis paper provided an evidence-based communicable summary of VAERS. As the most trusted sources of vaccine information, health practitioners can use this summary to provide evidence-based vaccine information to vaccine decision-makers (patients/parents) and mitigate concerns over vaccine safety and AEs. In addition, we identified 15 potential cognitive biases that might affect the vaccination decision-making process and nudge people toward vaccine hesitancy. Any plan, intervention, and message to increase vaccination uptake should be modified to decrease the effect of these potential cognitive biases.
| S-EPMC8444164 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) is a passive reporting system, used for monitoring the safety of all US licensed vaccines. In March 2008, ACAM2000(®) replaced Dryvax(®) as the only licensed smallpox vaccine and is administered to all persons entering military service and certain civilian researchers. In 2011, routine data mining of VAERS identified a vaccine safety concern resulting in acute ischemic cardiac events (ICE) following ACAM2000(®).During March 1, 2008 through June 30, 2013, we reviewed all serious reports received following ACAM2000(®)and classified them by diagnostic category. We identified possible ICE cases by searching the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Affairs (MedDRA(®)) terms for "myocardial ischaemia," "acute myocardial infarction," "myocardial infarction," and "ischaemia," and applied standardized surveillance case definitions.VAERS received 1149 reports following ACAM2000(®) administration; 169 (14.7%) were serious (resulting in permanent disability, hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization, life-threatening illness or death), including one death. The two most frequent diagnostic categories for serious reports were cardiovascular and other infectious conditions. The MedDRA(®) search found 31 reports of possible ICE after receipt of ACAM2000(®) vaccine. Of a total 30 possible ICE cases with demographic information, all but one was male; the age range was 20-45 years (median 32) and median interval to onset of symptoms was 12 days. On clinical review there were 16 cases of myocarditis/pericarditis and 15 ICE cases.Our review of the data mining signal did not substantiate the concerns about ICE after ACAM2000(®). Our study also suggests that with current pre-vaccination screening, cardiac morbidity in generally healthy vaccinated populations remains uncommon.
| S-EPMC5946322 | biostudies-other
Project description:Live viral vectors that express heterologous antigens of the target pathogen are being investigated in the development of novel vaccines against serious infectious agents like HIV and Ebola. As some live recombinant vectored vaccines may be replication-competent, a key challenge is defining the length of time for monitoring potential adverse events following immunization (AEFI) in clinical trials and epidemiologic studies. This time period must be chosen with care and based on considerations of pre-clinical and clinical trials data, biological plausibility and practical feasibility. The available options include: (1) adapting from the current relevant regulatory guidelines; (2) convening a panel of experts to review the evidence from a systematic literature search to narrow down a list of likely potential or known AEFI and establish the optimal risk window(s); and (3) conducting "near real-time" prospective monitoring for unknown clustering's of AEFI in validated large linked vaccine safety databases using Rapid Cycle Analysis for pre-specified adverse events of special interest (AESI) and Treescan to identify previously unsuspected outcomes. The risk window established by any of these options could be used along with (4) establishing a registry of clinically validated pre-specified AESI to include in case-control studies. Depending on the infrastructure, human resources and databases available in different countries, the appropriate option or combination of options can be determined by regulatory agencies and investigators.
| S-EPMC6535369 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Vaccine safety surveillance is essential in vaccination programs. We accomplished a descriptive study of surveillance AEFI-reporting rate in human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine administered in the Valencian Community, Spain. Data were obtained from Spanish Pharmacovigilance Adverse Reactions Data (FEDRA). Reporting rates were calculated using local net doses distributed as the denominator. Trends were assessed using joinpoint regression with annual percent change (APC) reported. The AEFI-reports decreased between 2008 and 2018 in two periods, a fast decreasing rate from 2009 to 2011 (from 192.2 to 24.93 per 100000 doses; APC, -54.9%; 95%CI [-75.2; -17.7]), followed by a stable trend (-13% APC, 95%CI [-26.1; 2.4]). For the age group analysis, only the group aged 14-15 years old followed the same trend with -58.4% (95%CI [-73.9; -33.8]) APC during 2008-2011, and -8.8% (95%CI [-27.7; 15]) APC during 2011-2018. The majority of the reports (73.82%) were nonserious, involving reactions at or near the vaccination site, headache, and dizziness events. No death was reported. AEFI-reporting rates for HPV immunization in the Valencian Community have decreased considerably with two trend periods observed for girls aged 14-15 years old. Currently, the AEFI reporting rate shows a decreasing trend, perhaps following the Weber effect, and it could also be affected by media attention and coverage.
| S-EPMC7157534 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The analysis of Adverse Events Following Immunization (AEFI) is important in a balanced epidemiological evaluation of vaccines and in the issues related to vaccine injury compensation programs. The majority of adverse reactions to vaccines occur as excessive or biased inflammatory and immune responses. These unwanted phenomena, occasionally severe, are associated with many different endogenous and exogenous factors, which often interact in complex ways. The confirmation or denial of the causal link between an AEFI and vaccination is determined pursuant to WHO guidelines, which propose a four-step analysis and algorithmic diagramming. The evaluation process from the onset considers all possible "other causes" that might explain the AEFI and thus exclude the role of the vaccine. Subsequently, even if there was biological plausibility and temporal compatibility for a causal association between the vaccine and the AEFI, the guidelines ask to look for any possible evidence that the vaccine could not have caused that event. Such an algorithmic method presents several concerns that are discussed here, in the light of the multifactorial nature of the inflammatory and immune pathologies induced by vaccines, including emerging knowledge of genetic susceptibility to adverse effects. It is proposed that the causality assessment could exclude a consistent association of the adverse event with the vaccine only when the presumed "other cause" is independent of an interaction with the vaccine. Furthermore, the scientific literature should be viewed not as an exclusion criterion but as a comprehensive analysis of all the evidence for or against the role of the vaccine in causing an adverse reaction. Given these inadequacies in the evaluation of multifactorial diseases, the WHO guidelines need to be reevaluated and revised. These issues are discussed in relation to the laws that, in some countries, regulate the mandatory vaccinations and the compensation for those who have suffered serious adverse effects.
| S-EPMC7111503 | biostudies-literature