Pandemic A/H1N1 influenza vaccination during pregnancy: a comparative study using the EFEMERIS database

Maternal influenza vaccination and associated risk of fetal loss: A claims-based prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although numerous studies support the safety of influenza vaccination during pregnancy, fewer studies have evaluated the risk of miscarriage or considered the effect of prior immunization.

METHODS

Using national de-identified administrative claims data from the Optum Labs Data Warehouse, we conducted a claims-based cohort study of 117,626 pregnancies between January 2009 and December 2018. We identified pandemic A(H1N1)pdm09 and seasonal influenza vaccinations using CPT codes. Fetal loss was defined as miscarriage, medical termination, or stillbirth as identified by ICD-10-CM diagnostic codes. Cox proportional hazard models treating influenza vaccination as a time-varying exposure, weighted for loss-to-follow-up and stratified by baseline probability of vaccination, were used to model the risk of fetal loss by exposure to influenza vaccine.

RESULTS

About 31.4 % of the cohort had a record of influenza vaccination; 10.0 % were vaccinated before pregnancy only, 17.8 % during pregnancy only, and 3.6 % before and during pregnancy. The risk of miscarriage was 39 % lower among those vaccinated during pregnancy compared to unvaccinated (adjusted hazard ratio, aHR 0.61; 95 % CI 0.50, 0.74) and was similar for medical termination or stillbirth (HR 0.69; 95 % CI 0.45, 1.03 and aHR 0.99; 95 % CI 0.76, 1.30, respectively). Similar results were observed for women who received the vaccine before and during pregnancy. We observed little to no association between vaccination before pregnancy and risk of miscarriage (HR 0.98; 95 % CI 0.76, 1.26), medical termination (HR 1.02; 95 % CI 0.46, 2.24), or stillbirth (HR 1.14, 95 % CI 0.77, 1.69).

DISCUSSION

Influenza vaccination was not associated with an increased risk of fetal loss. These results support the safety of influenza vaccine administration even when administered before or early during pregnancy.

Defining and reporting adverse events of special interest in comparative maternal vaccine studies: a systematic review

Introduction

The GAIA (Global Alignment on Immunisation Safety Assessment in Pregnancy) consortium was established in 2014 with the aim of creating a standardised, globally coordinated approach to monitoring the safety of vaccines administered in pregnancy. The consortium developed twenty-six standardised definitions for classifying obstetric and infant adverse events. This systematic review sought to evaluate the current state of adverse event reporting in maternal vaccine trials following the publication of the case definitions by GAIA, and the extent to which these case definitions have been adopted in maternal vaccine safety research.

Methods

A comprehensive search of published literature was undertaken to identify maternal vaccine research studies. PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane were searched using a combination of MeSH terms and keyword searches to identify observational or interventional studies that examined vaccine safety in pregnant women with a comparator group. A two-reviewer screening process was undertaken, and a narrative synthesis of the results presented.

Results

14,737 titles were identified from database searches, 435 titles were selected as potentially relevant, 256 were excluded, the remaining 116 papers were included. Influenza vaccine was the most studied (25.0%), followed by TDaP (20.7%) and SARS-CoV-2 (12.9%).Ninety-one studies (78.4%) were conducted in high-income settings. Forty-eight (41.4%) utilised electronic health-records. The majority focused on reporting adverse events of special interest (AESI) in pregnancy (65.0%) alone or in addition to reactogenicity (27.6%). The most frequently reported AESI were preterm birth, small for gestational age and hypertensive disorders. Fewer than 10 studies reported use of GAIA definitions. Gestational age assessment was poorly described; of 39 studies reporting stillbirths 30.8% provided no description of the gestational age threshold.

Conclusions

Low-income settings remain under-represented in comparative maternal vaccine safety research. There has been poor uptake of GAIA case definitions. A lack of harmonisation and standardisation persists limiting comparability of the generated safety data.

The EFEMEREYE Study: prenatal medication exposure and ocular anomaly occurrence in EFEMERIS health database

PURPOSE

To describe ocular anomalies (OAs) in children and fetuses in a French general population, to estimate their prevalence, and to investigate a possible association between prenatal medication exposure and the occurrence of OA in utero or in early childhood.

METHODS

We conducted a case-control study using the EFEMERIS cohort, a database containing pregnancies registered in Haute-Garonne and their outcomes. We collected OA descriptions of fetuses at the time of pregnancy termination or of children at birth and the results of eye examinations of children at 9 months and 2 years of age.

RESULTS

The prevalence of overall OAs was 2.13%, of which 0.04% were congenital ocular malformations (COMs). A total of 2,968 cases and 136,619 controls were selected for analysis. There was a significant difference between the two groups with regard to prenatal exposure to medications for the digestive tract and metabolism, the cardiovascular system, and the respiratory system. Multivariable analysis revealed an increased risk of OA in children of mothers exposed to magnesium during and 1 month before pregnancy (OR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.11-1.38).

CONCLUSIONS

This first pharmaco-epidemiological study on OA in France suggests that OA may be associated with exposure to commonly used medications. Given the rarity of COM, larger, international studies are warranted.

Safety of influenza vaccination during pregnancy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

We conducted a systematic review to evaluate associations between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes and maternal non-obstetric serious adverse events (SAEs), taking into consideration confounding and temporal biases.

METHODS

Electronic databases (Ovid MEDLINE ALL, Embase Classic+Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched to June 2021 for observational studies assessing associations between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and maternal non-obstetric SAEs and adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth, spontaneous abortion, stillbirth, small-for-gestational-age birth and congenital anomalies. Studies of live attenuated vaccines, single-arm cohort studies and abstract-only publications were excluded. Records were screened using a liberal accelerated approach initially, followed by a dual independent approach for full-text screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment. Pairwise meta-analyses were conducted, where two or more studies met methodological criteria for inclusion. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was used to assess evidence certainty.

RESULTS

Of 9443 records screened, 63 studies were included. Twenty-nine studies (24 cohort and 5 case-control) evaluated seasonal influenza vaccination (trivalent and/or quadrivalent) versus no vaccination and were the focus of our prioritised syntheses; 34 studies of pandemic vaccines (2009 A/H1N1 and others), combinations of pandemic and seasonal vaccines, and seasonal versus seasonal vaccines were also reviewed. Control for confounding and temporal biases was inconsistent across studies, limiting pooling of data. Meta-analyses for preterm birth, spontaneous abortion and small-for-gestational-age birth demonstrated no significant associations with seasonal influenza vaccination. Immortal time bias was observed in a sensitivity analysis of meta-analysing risk-based preterm birth data. In descriptive summaries for stillbirth, congenital anomalies and maternal non-obstetric SAEs, no significant association with increased risk was found in any studies. All evidence was of very low certainty.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of very low certainty suggests that seasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy is not associated with adverse birth outcomes or maternal non-obstetric SAEs. Appropriate control of confounding and temporal biases in future studies would improve the evidence base.

The perinatal health challenges of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases: A narrative review

The world has seen numerous infectious disease outbreaks in the past decade. In many cases these outbreaks have had considerable perinatal health consequences including increased risk of preterm delivery (e.g., influenza, measles, and COVID-19), and the delivery of low birth weight or small for gestational age babies (e.g., influenza, COVID-19). Furthermore, severe perinatal outcomes including perinatal and infant death are a known consequence of multiple infectious diseases (e.g., Ebola virus disease, Zika virus disease, pertussis, and measles). In addition to vaccination during pregnancy (where possible), pregnant women, are provided some level of protection from the adverse effects of infection through community-level application of evidence-based transmission-control methods. This review demonstrates that it takes almost 2 years for the perinatal impacts of an infectious disease outbreak to be reported. However, many infectious disease outbreaks between 2010 and 2020 have no associated pregnancy data reported in the scientific literature, or pregnancy data is reported in the form of case-studies only. This lack of systematic data collection and reporting has a negative impact on our understanding of these diseases and the implications they may have for pregnant women and their unborn infants. Monitoring perinatal health is an essential aspect of national and global healthcare strategies as perinatal life has a critical impact on early life mortality as well as possible effects on later life health. The unpredictable nature of emerging infections and the potential for adverse perinatal outcomes necessitate that we thoroughly assess pregnancy and perinatal health implications of disease outbreaks and their public health interventions in tandem with outbreak response efforts. Disease surveillance programs should incorporate perinatal health monitoring and health systems around the world should endeavor to continuously collect perinatal health data in order to quickly update pregnancy care protocols as needed.

Methodologic approaches in studies using real-world data (RWD) to measure pediatric safety and effectiveness of vaccines administered to pregnant women: A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

This scoping review mapped studies using real-world data (RWD) to measure pediatric safety and effectiveness of vaccines administered to pregnant women.

INTRODUCTION

In the US, two vaccines are recommended for all pregnant women to prevent illness in the infant: inactivated influenza vaccine (recommended since 2004), and the combined tetanus-diphtheria-acellular pertussis (Tdap) vaccine (recommended since 2013). This scoping review maps the studies conducted to date that address questions about pediatric safety and effectiveness of vaccines administered during pregnancy and provides a knowledge base for evaluating the use of RWD to study this issue.

METHODS

The scoping review was conducted following a published protocol. Methods included an electronic search of PubMed and Embase, screening of titles and abstracts by two reviewers, and double extraction of data for summary and synthesis. Studies that reported on pregnant women and the effectiveness or safety outcomes in their infants were included.

RESULTS

Forty-eight studies met the inclusion criteria of the scoping review protocol using RWD to assess safety or effectiveness of influenza or pertussis vaccinations administered to pregnant women with respect to pregnancy, infant or child outcomes. Detailed information about data sources, linkage of maternal and infant data, and operational definitions for gestational age were largely absent from the majority of studies raising concerns about reproducibility and validity of study findings.

CONCLUSIONS

A body of literature is available from which to plan and design future studies of vaccination in pregnant women using RWD. This is of intense importance as new vaccines, such as those for COVID-19, become available to the general population via approval or authorization without inclusion of pregnant women in the clinical trials.

One "misunderstood" health issue: demonstrating and communicating the safety of influenza a vaccination in pregnancy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) makes certain recommendations including the annual influenza vaccination of pregnant and pre-pregnant women during influenza (flu) season with an inactivated influenza vaccine as soon as it becomes available. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices in association with ACOG state that the vaccine is safe to be given any trimester during pregnancy. However, due to a lack of communication, the public is unaware of the effects of influenza A vaccination in pregnancy. Since this is a vital public health concern, we aimed to communicate with evidence, the safety of influenza A vaccination in pregnancy in order to improve the rate of influenza A vaccines in pregnant women.

Methods

This health communication issue was based on the impact of influenza vaccine on fetal outcomes. Therefore, a search was carried out through medical-based online databases including: Cochrane Central, EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov, and Google scholar for relevant English-based publications. Adverse fetal outcomes were considered as the endpoints of this analysis. The most specific RevMan 5.3 (latest version) software was used to carry out this analysis. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were involved in data and results representation and interpretation.

Results

A total number of 679, 992 pregnant women participated in this analysis. Based on this current analysis, premature/preterm birth (< 37 weeks) was significantly reduced in pregnant women who were vaccinated for influenza A (RR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.69–0.92; P = 0.002) as compared to those women who were not vaccinated. Similarly, influenza A vaccination decreased the risk for very preterm birth (< 32 weeks) (RR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.58–0.84; P = 0.0001). The risks for infants with low birth weight (RR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.49–1.04; P = 0.08), very low birth weight (RR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.23–2.11; P = 0.52) and infants small for gestational age (RR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.83–1.05; P = 0.26) were not increased with the vaccine. Influenza A vaccination was not associated with increased risks of stillbirth (RR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.38–1.03; P = 0.07), birth defects (RR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.26–1.72; P = 0.41), admission to neonatal intensive care unit or Apgar score < 7 in 5 min.

Conclusion

Influenza vaccine is completely safe in pregnancy. It significantly lowers premature birth and is not associated with any serious adverse neonatal outcome. Hence, this important piece of information should be communicated and conveyed to all pregnant women, for a safer and healthier pregnancy. At last, this public health issue should further be addressed to the population through media and other communication means in order to improve the rate of influenza A vaccines in pregnant women for a healthier and more productive population.

Effects of maternal influenza vaccination on adverse birth outcomes: A systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Although pregnant women are a priority group for influenza vaccination, its effect on birth outcomes has long been debated. Numerous observational studies and a few randomized controlled studies have been conducted, with inconsistent results.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the association of influenza vaccination in pregnancy with adverse birth outcomes.

DATA SOURCE

The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

This analysis included randomized placebo-controlled studies, cohort studies, and case-control studies, in which inactivated influenza vaccination was given during pregnancy and fetal adverse birth outcomes were assessed.

PARTICIPANTS & INTERVENTION

Women who received inactivated influenza vaccine during pregnancy and their offspring.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

Two independent reviewers and a third reviewer collaborated in study selection and data extraction. A Bayesian 3-level random-effects model was utilized to assess the impact of maternal influenza vaccination on birth outcomes, which were presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credible interval (CrIs). Bayesian outcome probabilities (P) of an OR<1 were calculated, and values of at least 90% (0.9) were deemed to indicate a significant result.

RESULTS

Among the 6,249 identified publications, 48 studies were eligible for the meta-analysis, including 2 randomized controlled trials, 41 cohort studies, and 5 case-control studies. The risk of none of the following adverse birth outcomes decreased significantly: preterm birth (OR = 0.945, 95% CrI: 0.736-1.345, P = 73.3%), low birth weight (OR = 0.928, 95% CrI: 0.432-2.112, P = 76.7%), small for gestational age (OR = 0.971, 95% CrI: 0.249-4.217,P = 63.3%), congenital malformation (OR = 1.026, 95% CrI: 0.687-1.600, P = 38.0%), and fetal death (OR = 0.942, 95% CrI: 0.560-1.954, P = 61.6%). Summary estimates including only cohort studies showed significantly decreased risks for preterm birth, small for gestational age and fetal death. However, after adjusting for season at the time of vaccination and countries' income level, only fetal death remained significant.

CONCLUSION

This Bayesian meta-analysis did not find a protective effect of maternal influenza vaccination against adverse birth outcomes, as reported in previous studies. In fact, our results showed evidence of null associations between maternal influenza vaccination and adverse birth outcomes.

Pharmacoepidemiology in pregnancy

Taking a medication is usually a challenge for a pregnant woman as the beneficial drug effect on the mother has to be considered regarding its potential adverse effects, not only for her but also for her unborn child. As medication use is common in pregnant women, by chance or necessity, it gives the opportunity to evaluate the consequences of prenatal drug exposure in real life through pharmacoepidemiological studies. This paper provides an overview of data sources, study designs and data analysis methods that can be used for pregnancy medication safety studies. In the future, the implementation of responsive international networks may be the keystones of drug evaluation in pregnancy.

The safety of inactivated influenza vaccines in pregnancy for birth outcomes: a systematic review

Pregnant women are at increased risk of morbidity and mortality from influenza and are recognized as a priority group for influenza vaccination. Despite this, uptake is often poor and one reason cited for this is concerns about safety. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of the safety of inactivated influenza vaccination (IIV) in pregnancy. Studies were included if they were: (i) observational or experimental design; (ii) included a comparator group comprising of unvaccinated pregnant women; (iii) comprised of either seasonal IIV or monovalent H1N1 IIV (including adjuvanted vaccines); and (iv) addressed one of the following outcomes: preterm birth (PTB), small for gestational age (SGA), fetal death (including stillbirth or spontaneous abortion), low birth weight (LBW) or congenital abnormalities. Two reviewers screened abstracts and titles and selected full texts for retrieval. Crude odds ratios were calculated from reported event rates, using binomial standard errors. Adjusted odds ratios, hazard ratios and relative rates were extracted as reported in each paper. After removal of duplicates and full text eligibility assessment, 40 studies remained. The aOR for PTB was 0.87 (0.78–0.96), for LBW 0.82 (0.76–0.89), congenital abnormality 1.03 (0.99–1.07), SGA 0.99 (0.94–1.04) and stillbirth 0.84 (0.65–1.08). This study contributes to the increasing body of safety data for IIV in pregnancy and reports a protective effect on PTB and LBW.

Birth outcomes following immunization of pregnant women with pandemic H1N1 influenza vaccine 2009-2010

BACKGROUND

Following the H1N1 influenza pandemic in 2009, pregnant women were recommended to receive both seasonal (TIV) and H1N1 influenza vaccines. This study presents incidence of adverse birth and pregnancy outcomes among a population of pregnant women immunized with TIV and H1N1 vaccines at Kaiser Permanente Northern California during 2009-2010.

METHODS

We telephone surveyed pregnant Kaiser Permanente Northern California members to assess non-medically-attended reactions following H1N1, TIV or both vaccines during 2009-2010 (n=5365) in a separate study. Here we assessed preterm birth (<37weeks), very preterm birth (<32weeks), low birth weight (<2500 g, LBW), very low birth weight (<1500g), small for gestational age, spontaneous abortions, stillbirths and congenital anomalies among this cohort by comparing incidence and 95% confidence intervals between the following immunization groups: TIV only, H1N1 only, H1N1 prior to TIV immunization, TIV prior to H1N1 and both immunizations given at the same time.

RESULTS

Results did not vary significantly between groups. Comparing H1N1 with TIV, incidence were similar for preterm births (6.37vs 6.28/100 births), very preterm births (5.30vs 8.29/1000 births), LBW (4.19vs 2.90/100 births), very LBW (4.54vs 5.52/1000 births), small for gestational age (9.99vs 9.24/1000 births), spontaneous abortion (7.10vs 6.83/1000 pregnancies), stillbirths (7.10vs 4.57/1000 pregnancies), and congenital anomalies (2.66vs 2.43/100 births).

CONCLUSIONS

Although constrained by small sample size, complex vaccine groups, and differential vaccine availability during 2009-2010, this study found no difference in adverse birth outcomes between H1N1 vaccine and TIV.

Immunogenicity and safety of subunit influenza vaccines in pregnant women

Pregnancy is a condition of modulated immune suppression, so this group of patients has increased risk of infectious diseases. Trivalent subunit vaccines, unadjusted Agrippal S1 (group I) and immunoadjuvant Grippol Plus (group II), containing 5 μg of actual influenza virus strains, were administered respectively to 37 and 42 women in the second and third trimester of physiological pregnancy. The administration of subunit influenza vaccines was accompanied by the development of local reactions in no more than 10% of patients, compared with 4.9% of the 41 pregnant women in the placebo group (group III). Systemic reactions were of a general somatic nature, did not differ between vaccinated and placebo groups, and were not associated with vaccination. Physiological births in groups I, II and III were 94.6%, 92.9% and 85.4%, respectively, and the birth rates of children without pathologies were 91.9%, 90.5% and 80.5%, respectively, and were comparable between groups. Vaccination stimulated the production of protective antibodies against influenza virus strains in 64.8-94.5% of patients after immunisation with an unadjusted vaccine and in 72.5-90.0% of patients after the administration of an immunoadjuvant vaccine. After 9 months, antibody levels were recorded in 51.3-72.9% in group I and 54.2-74.2% in group II. Immunisation against influenza in pregnant women provided a high level of seroprotection and seroconversion. Nevertheless, the level of seroprotection against the influenza strain A(H3N2, Victoria) was slightly lower in the group immunised with an unadjusted vaccine compared to those vaccinated with the immunoadjuvant vaccine.

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%).

Immunological Tolerance, Pregnancy, and Preeclampsia: The Roles of Semen Microbes and the Father

Although it is widely considered, in many cases, to involve two separable stages (poor placentation followed by oxidative stress/inflammation), the precise originating causes of preeclampsia (PE) remain elusive. We have previously brought together some of the considerable evidence that a (dormant) microbial component is commonly a significant part of its etiology. However, apart from recognizing, consistent with this view, that the many inflammatory markers of PE are also increased in infection, we had little to say about immunity, whether innate or adaptive. In addition, we focused on the gut, oral and female urinary tract microbiomes as the main sources of the infection. We here marshall further evidence for an infectious component in PE, focusing on the immunological tolerance characteristic of pregnancy, and the well-established fact that increased exposure to the father's semen assists this immunological tolerance. As well as these benefits, however, semen is not sterile, microbial tolerance mechanisms may exist, and we also review the evidence that semen may be responsible for inoculating the developing conceptus (and maybe the placenta) with microbes, not all of which are benign. It is suggested that when they are not, this may be a significant cause of PE. A variety of epidemiological and other evidence is entirely consistent with this, not least correlations between semen infection, infertility and PE. Our view also leads to a series of other, testable predictions. Overall, we argue for a significant paternal role in the development of PE through microbial infection of the mother via insemination.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of fetal outcomes following the administration of influenza A/H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women were identified as a population of priority for vaccination during the H1N1 influenza pandemic outbreak in 2009.

OBJECTIVES

To assess adverse fetal outcomes following the administration of H1N1 pandemic vaccination during pregnancy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Cohort studies investigating fetal outcomes after H1N1 influenza vaccination during pregnancy were eligible. The language was limited to English.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of reviewers independently screened studies for eligibility, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted data from the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 19 cohort studies were eligible. The use of vaccines during any period of pregnancy was associated with lower risk of stillbirth (adjusted hazard ratio 0.80, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.92). No significant differences were found between the vaccinated versus unvaccinated groups in terms of the risks of spontaneous abortion, premature birth, and small for gestational age.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of H1N1 vaccines during pregnancy might reduce the risk of stillbirth, a complication associated with H1N1 infection. The quality of evidence was, however, not adequate to reach a definitive conclusion.

The importance of pharmacoepidemiology in pregnancy-implications for safety

INTRODUCTION

Prescription of medications to pregnant women is usually a challenge as the drug benefit has to be considered regarding its potential adverse effects. As medication use is common in pregnant women, by chance or necessity, it gives the opportunity to evaluate the consequences of prenatal drug exposure in real life through pharmacoepidemiologic studies. Area covered: Data sources are numerous. Some of them have been created for the particular purpose of assessing medications during pregnancy. Augmented databases enable the study of delayed effects in late childhood and provide information on potential confounders. Each data source exhibits strengths and weaknesses. Several designs can be used to assess the safety of medications during pregnancy. Innovative designs have been developed in order to bypass major limits of classical methods. Expert opinion: An efficient system could follow up each pregnant woman, who had taken a medication, and consider her as a precious information for the knowledge of drug potential adverse actions against the child, who must be followed up to identify long term-effects. The diversity of data sources and approaches of pharmacoepidemiologic studies, the implementation of international networks as well as the improvement of adverse signal detection are the keystones of such an evaluation.

No association between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women are recommended to receive inactivated influenza vaccination anytime during pregnancy. Studies have investigated the impact of influenza vaccination during pregnancy on birth outcomes and results on preterm birth have been inconsistent.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study among children born at a gestational age≥24weeks from January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2015 at Kaiser Permanente Northern California facilities (KPNC). We evaluated the association between maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy and risk of preterm birth, small and large for gestational age, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), respiratory distress syndrome, low birth weight, and low Apgar score. We ascertained the dates of maternal influenza vaccination, conception, and delivery, as well as birth outcomes from KPNC inpatient and outpatient databases. Conditional multivariate Cox regression and logistic regression analyses were used to determine the association between maternal vaccination during pregnancy and risk of each birth outcome.

RESULTS

The study included 145,869 children. Maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy was not associated with risk of small or large for gestational age births, preterm birth, need for mechanical ventilation at birth, respiratory distress syndrome, admission to the NICU, low birth weight, or low Apgar score. However, when we did not control for immortal time bias, the risk of preterm birth (odds ratio [OR]=0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.66-0.72) was lower among infants of vaccinated mothers.

CONCLUSION

We found no association between maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes. When investigating preterm birth outcome in association with vaccination during pregnancy, immortal time bias should be taken into account in the analysis.

Neuraminidase inhibitors during pregnancy and risk of adverse neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations: population based European register study

Objective To evaluate the possible effects of exposure to neuraminidase inhibitors during embryo-fetal life with respect to adverse neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations.Design Population based multinational observational cohort study and meta-analysis.Setting National registers covering information on maternal healthcare, births, and prescriptions in Denmark, Norway, and Sweden and the EFEMERIS database from the Haute-Garonne district in France.Participants All women together with their singleton infants born between 1 January 2008 and 31 December 2010. Only infants born at 154 days of gestation or later were included. Infants were defined as exposed if the women filled a prescription during pregnancy for either of the two neuraminidase inhibitors oseltamivir or zanamivir.Main outcomes Low birth weight, low Apgar score, preterm birth, small for gestational age birth, stillbirth, neonatal mortality, neonatal morbidity, and congenital malformations. Crude and adjusted hazard ratios of preterm birth were estimated using Cox regression models. Crude and adjusted odds ratios for other outcomes were estimated by logistic regression models.Results The study included 5824 (0.8%) exposed women and their infants and 692 232 who were not exposed. Exposure to neuraminidase inhibitors in utero was not associated with increased risks of any of the investigated neonatal outcomes, including low birth weight (adjusted odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.65 to 0.91), low Apgar score (adjusted odds ratio 0.87, 0.67 to 1.14), preterm birth (adjusted hazard ratio 0.97, 0.86 to 1.10), small for gestational age birth (adjusted odds ratio 0.72, 0.59 to 0.87), stillbirth (adjusted odds ratio 0.81, 0.51 to 1.30), neonatal mortality (adjusted odds ratio 1.13, 0.56 to 2.28), and neonatal morbidity (adjusted odds ratio 0.92, 0.86 to 1.00). No increased risk of congenital malformations overall associated with maternal exposure was observed during the first trimester (adjusted odds ratio 1.06, 0.77 to 1.48). Similarly, no significantly increased risks of any of the outcomes were observed in an analysis restricted to oseltamivir alone.Conclusions This large multinational register study found no increased risks of adverse neonatal outcomes or congenital malformations associated with exposure to neuraminidase inhibitors during embryo-fetal life. The results support previously reported findings that the use of neuraminidase inhibitors is not associated with increased risks of adverse fetal or neonatal outcomes.

Safety of the 2011-12, 2012-13, and 2013-14 seasonal influenza vaccines in pregnancy: Preterm delivery and specific malformations, a study from the case-control arm of VAMPSS

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women have higher risks of influenza complications, but vaccine coverage is incomplete. Because concern about fetal harm limits uptake, we investigated risks for preterm delivery (PTD) and specific birth defects following vaccination in the 2011-12 through 2013-14 influenza seasons.

METHODS

We used data from the Slone Epidemiology Center's Birth Defects Study. For PTD, propensity score-adjusted time-varying hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for exposure anytime in pregnancy and for each trimester. For 42 specific major birth defects or birth defect categories, propensity score-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated.

RESULTS

For PTD (1803 fullterm deliveries, 107 PTD for all seasons combined), an elevated adjusted risk was observed for only the 2nd trimester of the 2011-12 season (HR=2.60, 95% CI 1.21, 5.61) - a reduction in gestational length of <2days. For the 42 specific defects or categories of defects (2866 cases, 1411 controls for all seasons combined) most adjusted risks were close to 1.0; the highest was 2.38 for omphalocele and the lowest was 0.50 for atrioventricular canal defects. None had lower confidence bounds >1.0. For each season separately, only one elevated OR had a lower 95% CI >1.0: omphalocele in 2011-12 (OR=5.19, 95% CI 1.44, 18.7).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results regarding risks for PTD and birth defects are generally reassuring. The few risks that were observed are compatible with chance, but warrant testing in other data. Given that vaccine components and manufacturing processes vary, continuing studies are needed to evaluate risks and safety of each season's vaccine and specific products.

Maternal vaccination for the prevention of influenza: current status and hopes for the future

Influenza is an important cause of morbidity and mortality among pregnant women and young infants, and influenza infection during pregnancy has also been associated with adverse obstetric and birth outcomes. There is substantial evidence - from randomized trials and observational studies - that maternal influenza immunization can protect pregnant women and their infants from influenza disease. In addition, there is compelling observational evidence that prevention of influenza in pregnant women can also protect against certain adverse pregnancy outcomes, including stillbirth and preterm birth. In this article we will review and evaluate the literature on both the burden of influenza disease in pregnant women and infants, as well as the multiple potential benefits of maternal influenza immunization for mother, fetus, and infant. We will also review key clinical aspects of maternal influenza immunization, as well as identify remaining knowledge gaps, and discuss avenues for future investigation.

Surveillance of antenatal influenza vaccination: validity of current systems and recommendations for improvement

BACKGROUND

Although influenza vaccination is recommended during pregnancy as standard of care, limited surveillance data are available for monitoring uptake. Our aim was to evaluate the validity of existing surveillance in Western Australia for measuring antenatal influenza immunisations.

METHODS

The self-reported vaccination status of 563 women who delivered between April and October 2013 was compared against three passive data collection sources: a state-wide antenatal influenza vaccination database maintained by the Department of Health, a public maternity hospital database, and a private health service database. Sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated for each system using self-report as the "gold standard."

RESULTS

The state-wide antenatal vaccination database detected 45.7 % (95 % CI: 40.1-51.4 %) of influenza vaccinations, the public maternity hospital database detected 66.7 % (95 % CI: 55.1-76.9 %), and the private health service database detected 29.1 % (95 % CI: 20.5-39.4 %). Specificity exceeded 90 % and positive predictive values exceeded 80 % for each system. Sensitivity was lowest for women whose antenatal care was provided by a private obstetrician.

CONCLUSIONS

Existing resources for surveillance of antenatal influenza vaccinations detect 29-67 % of vaccinations. Considering the importance of influenza immunisation as a public health intervention, particularly in pregnant women, improvements to routine monitoring of influenza vaccination is warranted.

Maternal vaccination against H1N1 influenza and offspring mortality: population based cohort study and sibling design

STUDY QUESTION

What is the mortality in offspring of mothers who had influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination during pregnancy?

METHODS

This was a prospective population based cohort study in seven healthcare regions in Sweden based on vaccinations taking place between 2 October 2009 and 26 November 2010. H1N1 vaccination data were linked with pregnancy and birth characteristics and offspring mortality data in 275,500 births (of which 1203 were stillbirths) from 137,886 mothers. Of these offspring, 41,183 had been exposed to vaccination with Pandemrix, a monovalent AS03 adjuvanted H1N1 influenza vaccine, during fetal life. A primary comparison group consisted of pregnancies of women who were not vaccinated during the same calendar period. In a second comparison, non-exposed siblings of infants prenatally exposed to vaccination were used as controls. Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios for stillbirth, early neonatal mortality (days 0-6 after birth), and subsequent mortality (beginning on day 7) in vaccinated versus non-vaccinated women, adjusting for mother's age at delivery, body mass index, parity, smoking, country of birth, and disposable income and for sex of offspring.

STUDY ANSWER AND LIMITATIONS

The results of this study suggest that AS03 adjuvanted H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy does not affect the risk of stillbirth, early neonatal death, or later mortality in the offspring. During follow-up, 1172 stillbirths, 380 early neonatal deaths, and 706 deaths thereafter occurred. Compared with general population controls, this corresponded to adjusted hazard ratios of 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.65 to 1.04) for stillbirth, 0.71 (0.44 to 1.14) for early neonatal death, and 0.97 (0.69 to 1.36) for later death. When siblings were used as controls, adjusted hazard ratios were 0.88 (0.59 to 1.30) for stillbirth, 0.82 (0.46 to 1.49) for early neonatal death, and 0.78 (0.52 to 1.19) for later death. Limitations of the study include lack of data on miscarriage before gestational week 22, inability to ascertain which mothers had pandemic flu during pregnancy, and lack of data on factors influencing the decision to vaccinate during pregnancy.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy is not associated with adverse fetal outcome or offspring mortality, including when familial factors are taken into account.

FUNDING, COMPETING INTERESTS, DATA SHARING

This project was supported by grants from the Swedish Research Council and the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research. NF was employed at the Swedish Medical Product Agency at the time of the study.

Sex-based differences in immune function and responses to vaccination

Females typically develop higher antibody responses and experience more adverse reactions following vaccination than males. These differences are observed in response to diverse vaccines, including the bacillus Calmette-Guerin vaccine, the measles, mumps and rubella vaccine, the yellow fever virus vaccine and influenza vaccines. Sex differences in the responses to vaccines are observed across diverse age groups, ranging from infants to aged individuals. Biological as well as behavioral differences between the sexes are likely to contribute to differences in the outcome of vaccination between the sexes. Immunological, hormonal, genetic and microbiota differences between males and females may also affect the outcome of vaccination. Identifying ways to reduce adverse reactions in females and increase immune responses in males will be necessary to adequately protect both sexes against infectious diseases.

Review on the effects of influenza vaccination during pregnancy on preterm births

Pregnant women are considered to be susceptible to severe influenza illness and are recommended as a priority group to be targeted for influenza vaccination in countries with vaccination programs. Increased rates of poor birth outcomes have also been temporally associated with influenza infection, especially when pandemics strains emerge. Even though the primary purpose for influenza vaccination during pregnancy is to decrease the risk of influenza infection in the women, other potential benefits include protection of their young infants against influenza illness and possibly improving birth outcomes. The 2009 influenza A/H1N1 pandemic highlighted the importance of influenza vaccination during pregnancy, after pregnant women were identified as a group with heightened morbidity and mortality during the pandemic. A few studies conducted before the 2009/10 season and a large number of reports during and after the 2009 pandemic have assessed the association between maternal influenza vaccination and birth outcomes. Although these studies indicate that influenza vaccination is safe for both the mother and the fetus, there are conflicting data on the effect of vaccination in improving preterm birth rates. We reviewed the 2 published randomized control trials and other observational studies that explored the relationship between maternal influenza vaccination and preterm births.

Influenza virus infection in pregnancy: a review

BACKGROUND

Influenza virus infection is very common and a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in specific populations like pregnant women. Following the 2009 pandemic, several reports on the effects of influenza virus infection on maternal health and pregnancy outcome have been published. Also the safety and efficacy of antiviral treatment and vaccination of pregnant women have been studied. In this review, we have analyzed and summarized these data.

OBJECTIVE

To provide information on the influence of influenza virus infection during pregnancy on maternal health and pregnancy outcome and on the effect of treatment and vaccination.

DATA SOURCES

We have searched Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library. We used influenza, influenz*, pregnancy and pregnan* as search terms.

STUDY SELECTION

In total, 294 reports were reviewed and judged according to the STROBE guidelines or CONSORT statement. In all, 100 studies, published between 1961 and 2015, were included.

RESULTS

Compared to the general population, pregnant women are more often hospitalized and admitted to an intensive care unit due to influenza virus infection. For hospitalized patients, increased rates of preterm birth and fetal/neonatal death are reported. Early treatment with oseltamivir is associated with a reduced risk of severe disease. Vaccination of pregnant women is safe and reduces maternal and neonatal morbidity.

CONCLUSIONS

There is level 2b evidence that maternal health and pregnancy outcome can be severely affected by influenza virus infection. Antiviral treatment may diminish these effects and vaccination protects pregnant women and neonates from infection (level of evidence 2b and 1b, respectively).

Maternal vaccination: moving the science forward

BACKGROUND

Infections remain one of the leading causes of morbidity in pregnant women and newborns, with vaccine-preventable infections contributing significantly to the burden of disease. In the past decade, maternal vaccination has emerged as a promising public health strategy to prevent and combat maternal, fetal and neonatal infections. Despite a number of universally recommended maternal vaccines, the development and evaluation of safe and effective maternal vaccines and their wide acceptance are hampered by the lack of thorough understanding of the efficacy and safety in the pregnant women and the offspring.

METHODS

An outline was synthesized based on the current status and major gaps in the knowledge of maternal vaccination. A systematic literature search in PUBMED was undertaken using the key words in each section title of the outline to retrieve articles relevant to pregnancy. Articles cited were selected based on relevance and quality. On the basis of the reviewed information, a perspective on the future directions of maternal vaccination research was formulated.

RESULTS

Maternal vaccination can generate active immune protection in the mother and elicit systemic immunoglobulin G (IgG) and mucosal IgG, IgA and IgM responses to confer neonatal protection. The maternal immune system undergoes significant modulation during pregnancy, which influences responsiveness to vaccines. Significant gaps exist in our knowledge of the efficacy and safety of maternal vaccines, and no maternal vaccines against a large number of old and emerging pathogens are available. Public acceptance of maternal vaccination has been low.

CONCLUSIONS

To tackle the scientific challenges of maternal vaccination and to provide the public with informed vaccination choices, scientists and clinicians in different disciplines must work closely and have a mechanistic understanding of the systemic, reproductive and mammary mucosal immune responses to vaccines. The use of animal models should be coupled with human studies in an iterative manner for maternal vaccine experimentation, evaluation and optimization. Systems biology approaches should be adopted to improve the speed, accuracy and safety of maternal vaccine targeting.

Fetal death and preterm birth associated with maternal influenza vaccination: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Before 2012, few studies had addressed pregnancy outcomes following maternal influenza vaccination; however, the number of publications on this topic has increased recently.

OBJECTIVES

To review comparative studies evaluating fetal death or preterm birth associated with influenza vaccination during pregnancy.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched bibliographic databases from inception to April 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Experimental or observational studies assessing the relationship between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and fetal death or preterm birth.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently abstracted data from studies meeting the inclusion criteria.

MAIN RESULTS

We included one randomised clinical trial and 26 observational studies. Meta-analyses were not considered appropriate because of high clinical and statistical heterogeneity. Three studies of fetal death at any gestational age reported adjusted effect estimates in the range 0.56-0.79, and four of five studies of fetal death at <20 weeks reported adjusted estimates between 0.89 and 1.23, all with confidence intervals including 1.0. Adjusted effect estimates for four of five studies of fetal death at ≥20 weeks ranged from 0.44 to 0.77 (two with confidence intervals not crossing 1.0), whereas a fifth reported a non-significant effect in the opposite direction. Among 19 studies of preterm birth, there was no strong evidence suggesting any increased risk, and meta-regression did not explain the moderate between-study heterogeneity (I(2) = 57%).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Most studies reported no association between fetal death or preterm birth and influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Although several reported risk reductions, results may be biased by methodological shortcomings of observational studies of influenza vaccine effectiveness.