A postmarketing evaluation of the safety of Ann Arbor strain live attenuated influenza vaccine in adults 18-49 years of age

Facial paralysis and vaccinations: a vaccine adverse event reporting system review

BACKGROUND

Vaccinations are a cornerstone of preventative medicine in the USA. However, growing concerns regarding facial nerve palsy following vaccination exist.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the occurrence of facial palsy as reported by the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the VAERS database was performed for cases of 'Facial Palsy', 'Bell's Palsy', 'Facial Paralysis' and 'Ramsay Hunt Syndrome' between 2009 and 2018. Subgroup analysis was performed to determine gender, age, history of facial palsy, type of vaccine used, number of days until onset of symptoms and overall facial palsy rate.

RESULTS

Nine hundred and forty-four entries met our inclusion criteria with 961 vaccine administrations resulting in facial paralysis. Facial palsy following vaccinations was evenly distributed across all age cohorts with two peaks between 60 and 74 years old and between 0 and 14 years old. Most patients were female (N = 526, 55.7%) without a reported history of facial palsy (N = 923, 97.8%). In 2009, reported incidence rate was 0.53%, as compared with 0.23% in 2018. The influenza vaccine had the greatest number of cases (N = 166, 17.3%), followed by the varicella (N = 87, 9.1%) and human papillomavirus vaccines (N = 47, 4.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

With the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic and recent approvals of the vaccinations, there is growing concern of facial palsy following vaccination. Although it is a known adverse event following vaccination, the likelihood of facial palsy following vaccination is low, with only 0.26% of overall reported cases over a 10-year span.

Safety of vaccines used for routine immunization in the United States: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Understanding the safety of vaccines is critical to inform decisions about vaccination. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review of the safety of vaccines recommended for children, adults, and pregnant women in the United States.

METHODS

We searched the literature in November 2020 to update a 2014 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality review by integrating newly available data. Studies of vaccines that used a comparator and reported the presence or absence of key adverse events were eligible. Adhering to Evidence-based Practice Center methodology, we assessed the strength of evidence (SoE) for all evidence statements. The systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020180089).

RESULTS

Of 56,603 reviewed citations, 338 studies reported in 518 publications met inclusion criteria. For children, SoE was high for no increased risk of autism following measles, mumps, and rubella (MMR) vaccine. SoE was high for increased risk of febrile seizures with MMR. There was no evidence of increased risk of  intussusception with rotavirus vaccine at the latest follow-up (moderate SoE), nor of diabetes (high SoE). There was no evidence of increased risk or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for newer vaccines such as 9-valent human papillomavirus and meningococcal B vaccines. For adults, there was no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) or insufficient evidence for key adverse events for the new adjuvanted inactivated influenza vaccine and recombinant adjuvanted zoster vaccine. We found no evidence of increased risk (varied SoE) for key adverse events among pregnant women following tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine, including stillbirth (moderate SoE).

CONCLUSIONS

Across a large body of research we found few associations of vaccines and serious key adverse events; however, rare events are challenging to study. Any adverse events should be weighed against the protective benefits that vaccines provide.

Use of routinely collected electronic healthcare data for postlicensure vaccine safety signal detection: a systematic review

Background

Concerns regarding adverse events following vaccination (AEFIs) are a key challenge for public confidence in vaccination. Robust postlicensure vaccine safety monitoring remains critical to detect adverse events, including those not identified in prelicensure studies, and to ensure public safety and public confidence in vaccination. We summarise the literature examined AEFI signal detection using electronic healthcare data, regarding data sources, methodological approach and statistical analysis techniques used.

Methods

We performed a systematic review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Five databases (PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science) were searched for studies on AEFIs monitoring published up to 25 September 2017. Studies were appraised for methodological quality, and results were synthesised narratively.

Result

We included 47 articles describing AEFI signal detection using electronic healthcare data. All studies involved linked diagnostic healthcare data, from the emergency department, inpatient and outpatient setting and immunisation records. Statistical analysis methodologies used included non-sequential analysis in 33 studies, group sequential analysis in two studies and 12 studies used continuous sequential analysis. Partially elapsed risk window and data accrual lags were the most cited barriers to monitor AEFIs in near real-time.

Conclusion

Routinely collected electronic healthcare data are increasingly used to detect AEFI signals in near real-time. Further research is required to check the utility of non-coded complaints and encounters, such as telephone medical helpline calls, to enhance AEFI signal detection.

Trial registration number

CRD42017072741.

Safety of guidelines recommending live attenuated influenza vaccine for routine use in children and adolescents with asthma

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate whether a guideline recommending Live Attenuated Influenza Vaccine (LAIV) for children 2 years and older with asthma increased risks for lower respiratory events (LREs), within 21 or 42 days of vaccination, as compared to standard guidelines to administer Inactivated Influenza Vaccine (IIV) in children with asthma.

METHODS

This was a pre/post guideline retrospective cohort study of children ages 2-17 years with asthma and receiving one or more influenza vaccines in two large medical groups from 2007 to 2016. Both groups recommended IIV in the pre-period; in 2010, one group implemented a guideline recommending LAIV for all children, including those with asthma. Main outcomes were medically attended LREs within 21 and 42 days after influenza immunization. Analysis used a generalized estimating equation regression to estimate the ratio of rate ratios (RORs) comparing pre/post events between LAIV guideline and control group.

RESULTS

The cohort included 7851 influenza vaccinations in 4771 children with asthma. Among patients in the LAIV guideline group, the proportion receiving LAIV increased from 23% to 68% post-guideline implementation, versus an increase from 7 to 11% in the control group. Age and baseline asthma severity adjusted ROR showed no increase in LREs, primarily asthma exacerbations, following implementation of the LAIV guideline: overall aROR (95% Confidence Interval): 0.74 (0.43-1.29) for LRE within 21 days of vaccination, 0.77 (0.53-1.14) for LRE within 42 days of vaccination. For the subset of children ages 2-4 years aROR: 0.92 (0.34-2.53) for LRE within 21 days of vaccination and 0.94 (0.49-1.82) for LRE within 42 days of vaccination; for children 5-18 years aROR (95% CI): 0.58 (0.26-1.30) for LRE within 21 days of vaccination and 0.67 (0.37-1.23) for LRE within 42 days.

CONCLUSION

In a large cohort of children with asthma, a guideline recommending LAIV rather than IIV did not increase LREs following vaccination.

Influenza vaccines: Evaluation of the safety profile

The safety of vaccines is a critical factor in maintaining public trust in national vaccination programs. Vaccines are recommended for children, adults and elderly subjects and have to meet higher safety standards, since they are administered to healthy subjects, mainly healthy children. Although vaccines are strictly monitored before authorization, the possibility of adverse events and/or rare adverse events cannot be totally eliminated. Two main types of influenza vaccines are currently available: parenteral inactivated influenza vaccines and intranasal live attenuated vaccines. Both display a good safety profile in adults and children. However, they can cause adverse events and/or rare adverse events, some of which are more prevalent in children, while others with a higher prevalence in adults. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of influenza vaccine safety according to target groups, vaccine types and production methods.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

The consequences of influenza in adults are mainly time off work. Vaccination of pregnant women is recommended internationally. This is an update of a review published in 2014. Future updates of this review will be made only when new trials or vaccines become available. Observational data included in previous versions of the review have been retained for historical reasons but have not been updated due to their lack of influence on the review conclusions.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (efficacy, effectiveness, and harm) of vaccines against influenza in healthy adults, including pregnant women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 12), MEDLINE (January 1966 to 31 December 2016), Embase (1990 to 31 December 2016), the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP; 1 July 2017), and ClinicalTrials.gov (1 July 2017), as well as checking the bibliographies of retrieved articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing influenza vaccines with placebo or no intervention in naturally occurring influenza in healthy individuals aged 16 to 65 years. Previous versions of this review included observational comparative studies assessing serious and rare harms cohort and case-control studies. Due to the uncertain quality of observational (i.e. non-randomised) studies and their lack of influence on the review conclusions, we decided to update only randomised evidence. The searches for observational comparative studies are no longer updated.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We rated certainty of evidence for key outcomes (influenza, influenza-like illness (ILI), hospitalisation, and adverse effects) using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 52 clinical trials of over 80,000 people assessing the safety and effectiveness of influenza vaccines. We have presented findings from 25 studies comparing inactivated parenteral influenza vaccine against placebo or do-nothing control groups as the most relevant to decision-making. The studies were conducted over single influenza seasons in North America, South America, and Europe between 1969 and 2009. We did not consider studies at high risk of bias to influence the results of our outcomes except for hospitalisation.Inactivated influenza vaccines probably reduce influenza in healthy adults from 2.3% without vaccination to 0.9% (risk ratio (RR) 0.41, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36 to 0.47; 71,221 participants; moderate-certainty evidence), and they probably reduce ILI from 21.5% to 18.1% (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.95; 25,795 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; 71 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing influenza, and 29 healthy adults need to be vaccinated to prevent one of them experiencing an ILI). The difference between the two number needed to vaccinate (NNV) values depends on the different incidence of ILI and confirmed influenza among the study populations. Vaccination may lead to a small reduction in the risk of hospitalisation in healthy adults, from 14.7% to 14.1%, but the CI is wide and does not rule out a large benefit (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.08; 11,924 participants; low-certainty evidence). Vaccines may lead to little or no small reduction in days off work (-0.04 days, 95% CI -0.14 days to 0.06; low-certainty evidence). Inactivated vaccines cause an increase in fever from 1.5% to 2.3%.We identified one RCT and one controlled clinical trial assessing the effects of vaccination in pregnant women. The efficacy of inactivated vaccine containing pH1N1 against influenza was 50% (95% CI 14% to 71%) in mothers (NNV 55), and 49% (95% CI 12% to 70%) in infants up to 24 weeks (NNV 56). No data were available on efficacy against seasonal influenza during pregnancy. Evidence from observational studies showed effectiveness of influenza vaccines against ILI in pregnant women to be 24% (95% CI 11% to 36%, NNV 94), and against influenza in newborns from vaccinated women to be 41% (95% CI 6% to 63%, NNV 27).Live aerosol vaccines have an overall effectiveness corresponding to an NNV of 46. The performance of one- or two-dose whole-virion 1968 to 1969 pandemic vaccines was higher (NNV 16) against ILI and (NNV 35) against influenza. There was limited impact on hospitalisations in the 1968 to 1969 pandemic (NNV 94). The administration of both seasonal and 2009 pandemic vaccines during pregnancy had no significant effect on abortion or neonatal death, but this was based on observational data sets.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Healthy adults who receive inactivated parenteral influenza vaccine rather than no vaccine probably experience less influenza, from just over 2% to just under 1% (moderate-certainty evidence). They also probably experience less ILI following vaccination, but the degree of benefit when expressed in absolute terms varied across different settings. Variation in protection against ILI may be due in part to inconsistent symptom classification. Certainty of evidence for the small reductions in hospitalisations and time off work is low. Protection against influenza and ILI in mothers and newborns was smaller than the effects seen in other populations considered in this review.Vaccines increase the risk of a number of adverse events, including a small increase in fever, but rates of nausea and vomiting are uncertain. The protective effect of vaccination in pregnant women and newborns is also very modest. We did not find any evidence of an association between influenza vaccination and serious adverse events in the comparative studies considered in this review. Fifteen included RCTs were industry funded (29%).

Bell's palsy and influenza(H1N1)pdm09 containing vaccines: A self-controlled case series

Background

An association between AS03 adjuvanted pandemic influenza vaccine and the occurrence of Bell’s palsy was found in a population based cohort study in Stockholm, Sweden. To evaluate this association in a different population, we conducted a self-controlled case series in a primary health care database, THIN, in the United Kingdom. The aim of this study was to determine whether there was an increased risk of Bell’s palsy following vaccination with any influenza vaccine containing A/California/7/2009 (H1N1)-like viral strains. Secondly, we investigated whether risks were different following pandemic influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccines and seasonal influenza vaccines containing the influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 strain.

Methods

The study population comprised all incident Bell’s palsy cases between 1 June 2009 and 30 June 2013 identified in THIN. We determined the relative incidence (RI) of Bell’s palsy during the 6 weeks following vaccination with either pandemic or seasonal influenza vaccine. All analyses were adjusted for seasonality and confounding variables.

Results

We found an incidence rate of Bell’s palsy of 38.7 per 100,000 person years. Both acute respiratory infection (ARI) consultations and pregnancy were found to be confounders. When adjusted for seasonality, ARI consultations and pregnancies, the RI during the 42 days after vaccination with an influenza vaccine was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.72–1.01). The RI was similar during the 42 days following seasonal vaccine (0.96, 95%CI: 0.82–1.13) or pandemic vaccine (0.73, 95%CI: 0.47–1.12).

Conclusion

We found no evidence for an increased incidence of Bell’s palsy following seasonal influenza vaccination overall, nor for monovalent pandemic influenza vaccine in 2009.

Safety of quadrivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine in subjects aged 2-49years

BACKGROUND

Quadrivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (Q/LAIV) was licensed in 2012 and replaced trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine in the United States during the 2013-2014 influenza season. This study assessed the safety of Q/LAIV in children and adults aged 2-49years.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational cohort study using data collected from Kaiser Permanente Northern California. Post-vaccination events of interest were any hospitalization, hospitalization for lower respiratory tract infection, and the following medically attended events: hypersensitivity, seizures/convulsions, lower respiratory tract infection, wheezing, Guillain-Barré syndrome, Bell's palsy, encephalitis, neuritis, vasculitis, and narcolepsy/cataplexy. The rates of these events during the risk interval post-vaccination were compared with rates observed during reference periods later in the follow-up (within-cohort analysis) and with rates observed in frequency-matched unvaccinated controls and inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) recipients.

RESULTS

A total of 62,040 eligible Q/LAIV recipients were identified during the 2013-2014 influenza season. Within-cohort comparisons of all Q/LAIV recipients as well as comparisons between Q/LAIV recipients and unvaccinated controls or IIV recipients did not show any significantly higher risk of hospitalizations or medically attended events following administration of Q/LAIV. Additional analyses by setting (clinic visits, emergency department visits, and hospital admissions) and age group (2-4, 5-8, 9-17, and 18-49years) also did not reveal clinically consistent findings that suggested any increased risk after administration of Q/LAIV.

CONCLUSION

In this large population study of individuals aged 2-49years, no safety signals associated with the administration of Q/LAIV were observed. A much larger study population would be needed to confidently reject any association between Q/LAIV and very rare events, specifically those with an incidence of <1 event/10,000 person-years.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01985997.

Adverse events following school-based vaccination of girls with quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in Slovenia, 2009 to 2013

Adverse events following immunisation (AEFIs) with qHPV reported to the Slovenian AEFI Registry for the first four school years of the vaccination programme were analysed. We calculated annual reporting rates for 11-14 year-old vaccinees with AEFIs, using the number of qHPV doses distributed within the school-based vaccination programme as the denominator. Between September 2009 and August 2013, 211 AEFIs that occurred in 89 vaccinees were reported, a rate of 149.5 vaccinees with AEFI per 100,000 qHPV doses distributed. For five vaccinees, serious AEFIs (8.4 per 100,000 doses distributed) were reported. The highest reporting rates were for fatigue, headache, and fever (≥ 38.0⁰) (53.8, 40.3, and 35.3 per 100,000 qHPV doses distributed, respectively). As no AEFI resulted in permanent sequelae and they all were categorised as serious only due to the criterion of a minimum of one day of hospitalisation, this provides reassurance for the safety of our school-based HPV vaccination programme. Further AEFI surveillance is warranted to provide data for HPV vaccination programme monitoring and evaluation of its safety.

Vaccination of healthcare workers: A review

Vaccine-preventable diseases are a significant cause of morbidity and mortality. As new vaccines are proving to be effective and as the incidence of some infections decreases, vaccination practices are changing. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are particularly exposed to and play a role in nosocomial transmission, which makes them an important target group for vaccination. Most vaccine-preventable diseases still carry a significant risk of resurgence and have caused outbreaks in recent years. While many professional societies favor vaccination of HCWs as well as the general population, recommendations differ from country to country. In turn, vaccination coverage varies widely for each microorganism and for each country, making hospitals and clinics vulnerable to outbreaks. Vaccine mandates and non-mandatory strategies are the subject of ongoing research and controversies. Optimal approaches to increase coverage and turn the healthcare workforce into an efficient barrier against infectious diseases are still being debated.

Post-licensure safety surveillance study of routine use of tetanus toxoid, reduced diphtheria toxoid and 5-component acellular pertussis vaccine

An observational post-licensure (Phase IV) retrospective large-database safety study was conducted at Kaiser Permanente, a US integrated medical care organization, to assess the safety of Tetanus Toxoid, Reduced Diphtheria Toxoid and 5-Component Acellular Pertussis Vaccine (Tdap5) administered as part of routine healthcare among adolescents and adults. We evaluated incidence rates of various clinical events resulting in outpatient clinic, emergency department (ED), and hospital visits during various time intervals (windows) following Tdap5 vaccination using 2 pharmacoepidemiological methods (risk interval and historic cohort) and several screening thresholds. Plausible outcomes of interest with elevated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were further evaluated by reviewing individual patient records to confirm the diagnosis, timing (temporal relationship), alternative etiology, and other health record details to discern possible relatedness of the health events to vaccination. Overall, 124,139 people received Tdap5 vaccine from September 2005 through mid-October 2006, and 203,154 in the comparison cohort received a tetanus and diphtheria toxoid adsorbed vaccine (and no live virus vaccine) during the year prior to initiation of this study. In the outpatient, ED and hospital databases, respectively, we identified 11/26, 179/700 and 187/700 unique health outcomes with IRRs significantly >1.0. Among the same unique health outcomes in the outpatient, ED, and hospital databases, 9, 146, and 385, respectively, had IRRs significantly <1.0. Further scrutiny of the outcomes with elevated IRRs did not reveal unexpected signals of adverse outcomes related to vaccination. In conclusion, Tdap5 vaccine was found to be safe among this large population of adolescents and adults.

Safety of DTaP-IPV/Hib vaccine administered routinely to infants and toddlers

BACKGROUND

The combination DTaP-IPV/Hib vaccine was licensed in the United States in 2008 for children ages 6weeks through 4years with doses administered at 2, 4, 6, and 15-18months of age. The aim of this study was to assess the safety of DTaP-IPV/Hib vaccine routinely administered as part of clinical care to infants at Kaiser Permanente Northern California.

METHODS

This was an observational, retrospective study that included all 2-month-old infants vaccinated with either DTaP-IPV/Hib or another DTaP-containing vaccine. We monitored all subjects for non-elective hospitalizations, emergency department visits and selected outpatient outcomes (seizures, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, encephalopathy, encephalitis, alteration of consciousness, meningitis, hypersensitivity reactions, immune thrombocytopenic purpura, hemolytic anemia, type 1 diabetes, and Kawasaki disease) beginning with their first dose through 6months after a 4th dose or until 24months of age. We calculated incidence rate ratios (IRRs) in the primary analysis by comparing rates of outcomes during the post-vaccination risk interval with rates during a comparison interval more remote from vaccination. Secondary analyses compared outcomes after DTaP-IPV/Hib with those after other DTaP-containing vaccines. We reviewed the medical records of selected outcomes.

RESULTS

From October 1, 2008 through July 31, 2010, 14,042 subjects received a first dose of DTaP-IPV/Hib, 13,194 received 2 doses, 12,548 received 3 doses and 6702 received 4 doses. Overall, there were 166 comparisons with significantly elevated IRRs and 165 comparisons with significantly reduced IRRs. Medical record review of outcomes with significantly elevated IRRs in both the primary and secondary analyses did not suggest any relationship with DTaP-IPV/Hib.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not detect any safety concerns following DTaP-IPV/Hib and provides reassurance that DTaP-IPV/Hib administered as part of routine care was not associated with unexpected safety risks. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00804284.

Effectiveness and acceptance of a health care-based mandatory vaccination program

OBJECTIVE

To decrease the risk of transmission of hospital-associated transmission of influenza and pertussis through mandatory vaccination of staff.

METHODS

A mandatory influenza and toxoid-diphtheria toxoid-acellular pertussis program was implemented systemwide. A structured vaccine exemption program was implemented for those requesting a medical and/or religious/moral/ethical exemption.

RESULTS

Systemwide influenza vaccination rates increased from 67% historically, 76.2% in the 2012 to 2013 influenza season, to 94.7% in 2013 to 2014 with an overall compliance rate of 97.8%. Toxoid-diphtheria toxoid-acellular pertussis vaccination rates systemwide reached 94.9%, with an overall compliance rate of 98%. Higher rates were experienced at individual hospital facilities compared with the corporate location.

CONCLUSIONS

Successful vaccination campaign outcomes can be achieved through diligent enforcement of mandatory vaccination, masking, and other infection prevention procedures.

Safety of measles-containing vaccines in 1-year-old children

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

All measles-containing vaccines are associated with several types of adverse events, including seizure, fever, and immune thrombocytopenia purpura (ITP). Because the measles-mumps-rubella-varicella (MMRV) vaccine compared with the separate measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) and varicella (MMR + V) vaccine increases a toddler's risk for febrile seizures, we investigated whether MMRV is riskier than MMR + V and whether either vaccine elevates the risk for additional safety outcomes.

METHODS

Study children were aged 12 to 23 months in the Vaccine Safety Datalink from 2000 to 2012. Nine study outcomes were investigated: 7 main outcomes (anaphylaxis, ITP, ataxia, arthritis, meningitis/encephalitis, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, and Kawasaki disease), seizure, and fever. Comparing MMRV with MMR + V, relative risk was estimated by using stratified exact binomial tests. Secondary analyses examined post-MMRV or MMR + V risk versus comparison intervals; risk and comparison intervals were then contrasted for MMRV versus MMR+V.

RESULTS

We evaluated 123,200 MMRV and 584,987 MMR + V doses. Comparing MMRV with MMR + V, risks for the 7 main outcomes were not significantly different. Several outcomes had few or zero postvaccination events. Comparing risk versus comparison intervals, ITP risk was higher after MMRV (odds ratio [OR]: 11.3 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.9 to 68.2]) and MMR + V (OR: 10 [95% CI: 4.5 to 22.5]) and ataxia risk was lower after both vaccines (MMRV OR: 0.8 [95% CI: 0.5 to 1]; MMR + V OR: 0.8 [95% CI: 0.7 to 0.9]). Compared with MMR + V, MMRV increased risk of seizure and fever 7 to 10 days after vaccination.

CONCLUSIONS

This study did not identify any new safety concerns comparing MMRV with MMR + V or after either the MMRV or the MMR + V vaccine. This study provides reassurance that these outcomes are unlikely after either vaccine.

Post-licensure surveillance of trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine in adults, United States, Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), July 2005-June 2013

BACKGROUND

Trivalent live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV3) was licensed and recommended for use in 2003 in children and adults 2-49 years of age. Post-licensure safety data have been limited, particularly in adults.

METHODS

We searched Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) for US reports after LAIV3 from July 1, 2005-June 30, 2013 (eight influenza seasons) in adults aged ≥ 18 years old. We conducted descriptive analyses and clinically reviewed serious reports (i.e., death, life-threatening illness, hospitalization, prolonged hospitalization, or permanent disability) and reports of selected conditions of interest. We used empirical Bayesian data mining to identify adverse events (AEs) that were reported more frequently than expected. We calculated crude AE reporting rates to VAERS by influenza season.

RESULTS

During the study period, VAERS received 1207 LAIV3 reports in adults aged 18-49 years old; 107 (8.9%) were serious, including four death reports. The most commonly reported events were expired drug administered (n=207, 17%), headache (n=192, 16%), and fever (n=133, 11%). The most common diagnostic categories for non-fatal serious reports were neurological (n=40, 39%), cardiovascular (n=14, 14%), and other non-infectious conditions (n=20, 19%). We noted a higher proportion of Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS) and cardiovascular reports in the Department of Defense (DoD) population compared to the civilian population. Data mining detected disproportional reporting of ataxia (n=15); clinical review revealed that ataxia was a component of diverse clinical entities including GBS.

CONCLUSIONS

Review of VAERS reports are reassuring, the only unexpected safety concern for LAIV3 identified was a higher than expected number of GBS reports in the DoD population, which is being investigated. Reports of administration of expired LAIV3 represent administration errors and indicate the need for education, training and screening regarding the approved indications.

Development of live attenuated influenza vaccines against pandemic influenza strains

Avian and animal influenza viruses can sporadically transmit to humans, causing outbreaks of varying severity. In some cases, further human-to-human virus transmission does not occur, and the outbreak in humans is limited. In other cases, sustained human-to-human transmission occurs, resulting in worldwide influenza pandemics. Preparation for future pandemics is an important global public health goal. A key objective of preparedness is to gain an understanding of how to design, test, and manufacture effective vaccines that could be stockpiled for use in a pandemic. This review summarizes results of an ongoing collaboration to produce, characterize, and clinically test a library of live attenuated influenza vaccine strains (based on Ann Arbor attenuated Type A strain) containing protective antigens from influenza viruses considered to be of high pandemic potential.

Vaccines for preventing influenza in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Different types of influenza vaccines are currently produced worldwide. Vaccination of pregnant women is recommended internationally, while healthy adults are targeted in North America.

OBJECTIVES

To identify, retrieve and assess all studies evaluating the effects (efficacy, effectiveness and harm) of vaccines against influenza in healthy adults, including pregnant women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 2), MEDLINE (January 1966 to May 2013) and EMBASE (1990 to May 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing influenza vaccines with placebo or no intervention in naturally occurring influenza in healthy individuals aged 16 to 65 years. We also included comparative studies assessing serious and rare harms.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 90 reports containing 116 data sets; among these 69 were clinical trials of over 70,000 people, 27 were comparative cohort studies (about eight million people) and 20 were case-control studies (nearly 25,000 people). We retrieved 23 reports of the effectiveness and safety of vaccine administration in pregnant women (about 1.6 million mother-child couples).The overall effectiveness of parenteral inactivated vaccine against influenza-like illness (ILI) is limited, corresponding to a number needed to vaccinate (NNV) of 40 (95% confidence interval (CI) 26 to 128). The overall efficacy of inactivated vaccines in preventing confirmed influenza has a NNV of 71 (95% CI 64 to 80). The difference between these two values depends on the different incidence of ILI and confirmed influenza among the study populations: 15.6% of unvaccinated participants versus 9.9% of vaccinated participants developed ILI symptoms, whilst only 2.4% and 1.1%, respectively, developed laboratory-confirmed influenza.No RCTs assessing vaccination in pregnant women were found. The only evidence available comes from observational studies with modest methodological quality. On this basis, vaccination shows very limited effects: NNV 92 (95% CI 63 to 201) against ILI in pregnant women and NNV 27 (95% CI 18 to 185) against laboratory-confirmed influenza in newborns from vaccinated women.Live aerosol vaccines have an overall effectiveness corresponding to a NNV 46 (95% CI 29 to 115).The performance of one-dose or two-dose whole virion pandemic vaccines was higher, showing a NNV of 16 (95% CI 14 to 20) against ILI and a NNV of 35 (95% CI 33 to 47) against influenza, while a limited impact on hospitalisation was found (NNV 94, 95% CI 70 to 1022).Vaccination had a modest effect on time off work and had no effect on hospital admissions or complication rates. Inactivated vaccines caused local harms. No evidence of association with serious adverse events was found, but the harms evidence base was limited.The overall risk of bias in the included trials is unclear because it was not possible to assess the real impact of bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Influenza vaccines have a very modest effect in reducing influenza symptoms and working days lost in the general population, including pregnant women. No evidence of association between influenza vaccination and serious adverse events was found in the comparative studies considered in the review. This review includes 90 studies, 24 of which (26.7%) were funded totally or partially by industry. Out of the 48 RCTs, 17 were industry-funded (35.4%).

Motor palsies of cranial nerves (excluding VII) after vaccination: reports to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System

We reviewed cranial nerve palsies, other than VII, that have been reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). We examined patterns for differences in vaccine types, seriousness, age, and clinical characteristics. We identified 68 reports of cranial nerve palsies, most commonly involving the oculomotor (III), trochlear (IV), and abducens (VI) nerves. Isolated cranial nerve palsies, as well as palsies occurring as part of a broader clinical entity, were reported. Forty reports (59%) were classified as serious, suggesting that a cranial nerve palsy may sometimes be the harbinger of a broader and more ominous clinical entity, such as a stroke or encephalomyelitis. There was no conspicuous clustering of live vs. inactivated vaccines. The patient age range spanned the spectrum from infants to the elderly. Independent data may help to clarify whether, when, and to what extent the rates of cranial nerve palsies following particular vaccines may exceed background levels.

Kaiser Permanente Vaccine Study Center: Highlights of 2009-2012

The Kaiser Permanente Vaccine Study Center is a specialized research organization in Oakland, California. They have been an active vaccine research group for many years, and have participated in and led a multitude of vaccine studies. This article will review the last three years of research activities.

Assessing the safety of influenza vaccination in specific populations: children and the elderly

Comprehensive monitoring of the safety of influenza vaccines remains a public health priority, particularly as immunization coverage increases across different age groups at the global level. In this review, the authors provide state-of-the-art knowledge on the safety of influenza immunization among children and the elderly. The authors review the safety information in each group separately for inactivated and live attenuated influenza vaccines. Adverse events of special concern including febrile seizure, narcolepsy, asthma and Guillain-Barré syndrome are covered under specific considerations. The authors discuss the current status of the field, particularly the use of new technologies for influenza vaccines and their potential safety profile.

A postlicensure evaluation of the safety of Ann Arbor strain live attenuated influenza vaccine in children 24-59 months of age

BACKGROUND

In the United States, live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) was initially approved for use in individuals aged 5-49 years in 2003, which was extended to individuals aged 2-49 years in 2007. At that time, a postlicensure commitment was made to describe the safety of LAIV within a cohort of eligible children aged 2-5 years.

METHODS

A prospective observational postmarketing study was conducted to evaluate the safety of LAIV. Rates of medically attended events (MAEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) in eligible children aged 24-59 months receiving LAIV as part of routine care from October 2007 to March 2010 were compared with rates in a within-cohort self-control, as well as matched unvaccinated and matched trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (TIV)-vaccinated controls. Children with asthma and other high-risk medical conditions before vaccination were excluded. All MAEs and SAEs through 42 days postvaccination and all hospitalizations and deaths through 6 months postvaccination were analyzed. Statistical significance was declared without multiplicity adjustment.

RESULTS

A total of 28,226 unique LAIV recipients were matched with similar numbers of TIV-vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Of 4696 MAE incidence rate comparisons, 83 (1.8%) were statistically significantly higher and 221 (4.7%) were statistically significantly lower in LAIV recipients versus controls. No pattern of MAE rate differences suggested a safety signal with LAIV. Asthma/wheezing MAEs were not statistically increased in LAIV recipients. No anaphylaxis events occurred within 3 days postvaccination. Rates of SAEs were similar between LAIV and control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Results of this postlicensure evaluation of LAIV safety in US children are consistent with preapproval clinical studies and Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System reports, both of which demonstrated no significant increase in asthma/wheezing events or other adverse outcomes among eligible children aged 24-59 months who received LAIV.