The critical role of background rates of possible adverse events in the assessment of COVID-19 vaccine safety

Variation in incidence rates of outcomes relevant to vaccine safety monitoring in a US commercially insured population by case identification algorithm

BACKGROUND

Large health insurance claims databases can be used to estimate rates of rare safety outcomes. We measured incidence rates of rare outcomes that could be used to contextualize adverse events among people receiving pneumococcal vaccines in clinical trials or clinical practice. However, algorithms used to identify outcomes in administrative databases are subject to error. Using two algorithms for each outcome, we assessed the influence of algorithm choice on the rates of the outcomes.

METHODS

We used closed administrative medical and pharmacy claims in the Healthcare Integrated Research DatabaseSM (HIRD) to construct a broad cohort of individuals less than 100 years old (i.e., the target cohort) and a trial-similar cohort of individuals resembling those potentially eligible for a vaccine clinical trial (e.g., for a pneumococcal vaccine). We stratified by age and sex and used specific and sensitive algorithms to estimate rates of 39 outcomes including cardiac/cerebrovascular, metabolic, allergic/autoimmune, neurological, and hematologic outcomes. Specific algorithms intended to reduce false positive errors, while sensitive algorithms intended to reduce false negative errors, thereby providing lower and upper bounds for the "true" rates.

RESULTS

We followed approximately 40 million individuals in the target cohort for an average of 3 years. Of 39 outcomes, 14 (36 %) had a rate from the specific algorithm that was less than half the rate from the sensitive algorithm. Rates of cardiac/cerebrovascular outcomes were most consistent (mean ratio of rates from specific algorithms compared to rates from sensitive algorithms = 0.76), while the rates of neurological and hematologic outcomes were the least consistent (mean ratio of rates = 0.33 and 0.36, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

For many cardiac/cerebrovascular outcomes, rates were similar regardless of the algorithm. For other outcomes, rates varied substantially by algorithm. Using multiple algorithms to ascertain outcomes in claims data can be informative about the extent of uncertainty due to outcome misclassification.

Obstetric and neonatal outcomes in South Africa

BACKGROUND

Background epidemiologic population data from low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), on maternal, foetal and neonatal adverse outcomes are limited. We aimed to estimate the incidence of maternal, foetal and neonatal adverse outcomes at South African maternal vaccine trial sites as reported directly in the clinical notes as well as using the 'Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in Pregnancy' case definitions (GAIA-CDs). GAIA-CDs were utilized as a tool to standardise data collection and outcome assessment, and the applicability and utility of the GAIA-CDs was evaluated in a LMIC observational study.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective record review of maternity and neonatal case records for births that occurred in Soweto, Inner City- Johannesburg and Metro-East Cape Town, South Africa, between 1st July 2017 and 30th June 2018. Study staff abstracted data from randomly selected medical charts onto standardized study-specific forms. Incidence (per 100,000 population) was calculated for adverse maternal, foetal and neonatal outcomes, which were identified as priority outcomes in vaccine safety studies by the Brighton Collaboration and World Health Organization. Outcomes reported directly in the clinical notes and outcomes which fulfilled GAIA-CDs were compared. Incidence of outcomes was calculated by combining cases which were either reported in clinical notes by attending physicians and/ or fulfilled GAIA-CDs.

FINDINGS

Of 9371 pregnant women enrolled, 27·6% were HIV-infected, 19·9% attended antenatal clinic in the 1st trimester of pregnancy and 55·3% had ≥1 ultrasound examination. Fourteen percent of women had hypertensive disease of pregnancy, 1·3% had gestational diabetes mellitus and 16% experienced preterm labour. There were 150 stillbirths (1·6%), 26·8% of infants were preterm and five percent had microcephaly. Data available in clinical notes for some adverse outcomes, including maternal- & neonatal death, severe pre-eclampsia/ eclampsia, were able to fulfil GAIA-CDs criteria for all of the clinically-reported cases, however, missing data required to fulfil other GAIA-CD criteria (including stillbirth, gestational diabetes mellitus and gestational hypertension) led to poor correlation between clinically-reported adverse outcomes and outcomes fulfilling GAIA-CDs. Challenges were also encountered in accurately ascertaining gestational age.

INTERPRETATION

This study contributes to the expanding body of data on background rates of adverse maternal and foetal/ neonatal outcomes in LMICs. Utilization of GAIA-CDs assists with alignment of data, however, some GAIA-CDs require amendment to improve the applicability in LMICs.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Pfizer (Inc).

COVID-19 vaccine safety: Background incidence rates of anaphylaxis, myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré Syndrome, and mortality in South Korea using a nationwide population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

To properly assess an association between vaccines and specific adverse events requires a comparison between the observed and background rates; however, studies in South Korea are currently limited. Therefore, in this study, we estimated the background incidence of anaphylaxis, myocarditis, pericarditis, Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), and mortality in South Korea.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the National Sample Cohort (NSC) data. Using NSC, the background incidence rate was estimated by dividing the number of episodes during 2009-2019 by the total population by year and then multiplying by 100,000. Using Statistics Korea data, the background mortality rate was estimated by dividing the number of deaths, during 2009-2019 by the standard population for that year and then multiplying by 100,000. Using background mortality rates, we predicted mortality rates for 2021 using autoregressive integrated moving average models. Further, the expected mortality rates were compared with observed mortality rates.

RESULTS

The age-adjusted incidence rate (AIR) of anaphylaxis increased from 4.28 to 22.90 cases per 100,000 population (p = 0.003); myocarditis showed no significant increase, changing from 0.56 to 1.26 cases per 100,000 population (p = 0.276); pericarditis increased from 0.94 to 1.88 cases per 100,000 population (p = 0.005); and GBS increased from 0.78 to 1.21 cases per 100,000 population (p = 0.013). The age-adjusted mortality rate decreased from 645.24 to 475.70 deaths per 100,000 population (p <0.001). The 2021 observed/expected mortality rates for overall (ratio: 1.08, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.07-1.08), men (ratio: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.07-1.08), and women (ratio: 1.08, 95% CI: 1.07-1.09), were all significantly higher. When stratified by age group, those aged ≥80 (ratio: 1.16, 95% CI: 1.15-1.17), 60-69 (ratio: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.10-1.13), and 20-29 years old (ratio: 1.07, 95% CI: 1.02-1.13) were also significantly higher.

CONCLUSION

Through the estimation of background rates related to anaphylaxis, myocarditis, pericarditis, GBS, and mortality, we established a reference point for evaluating the potential excess occurrence of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccination. This reference point serves as substantive evidence supporting the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.

What would have happened anyway? Population data source considerations when estimating background incident rates of adverse events following immunisation to inform vaccine safety

INTRODUCTION

Understanding background incident rates of adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) is essential to rapidly detect, evaluate, respond to, and communicate about vaccine safety concerns, especially for new vaccines. Creating estimates based on geographic specific population level data is increasingly important, as new AEFI presentations will be subject to the same local influences of population demography, exposures, health system variations and level of health care sought.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of hospital admissions, emergency department presentations and general practice consultations from 2015 to 2019-before introduction of COVID-19, Mpox or Shingrix vaccination-to estimate background incident rates for 37 conditions considered potential AEFI of special interest (AESI). Background incident rates per 100,000 population were calculated and presented as cases expected to occur coincidentally 1 day, 1 week and 6 weeks post-vaccination, by life-stage age-groups and presenting healthcare setting. We then assessed the proportional contribution of each data source to inform each AESI background rate estimate.

RESULTS

16,437,156 episodes of the 37 AESI were identified. Hospital admissions predominantly informed 19 (51%) of AESI, including exclusively ADEM and CVST; 8 AESI (22%) by primary care, and 10 (27%) a mix. Four AESI (allergic urticaria, Bell's palsy, erythema multiform and sudden death) were better informed by emergency presentations than admissions, but conversely 11 AESI (30%) were not captured in ICD-10 coded emergency presentations at all.

CONCLUSIONS

Emergent safety concerns are inevitable in population-wide implementation of new vaccines, therefore understanding local background rates aids both safety signal detection as well as maintaining public confidence in vaccination. Hospital and primary care data sources can be interrogated to inform expected background incident rates of adverse events that may occur following vaccination. However, it is necessary to understand which data-source provides best intelligence according to nature of condition and presenting healthcare setting.

Myocarditis and pericarditis risk with mRNA COVID-19 vaccination compared to unvaccinated individuals: A retrospective cohort study in a Spanish Tertiary Hospital

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the incidence of pericarditis and myocarditis in patients exposed to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines to the incidence in those who were not vaccinated, considering the incidence of these conditions resulting from COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of individuals assigned to health area of La Paz University Hospital in Spain. The exposure factor was vaccination with mRNA COVID-19 vaccines between December 27th, 2020 and January 9th, 2022 with a minimum follow-up of one month. The outcome was the incidence of pericarditis or myocarditis in these individuals.

RESULTS

The incidence of pericarditis and myocarditis in the total population exposed to at least one dose of mRNA COVID-19 vaccines was 5/100,000 (CI95%:3 to 8 per 100,000), compared to 70/100,000 (CI95%: 66 to 92 per 100,000) in those who were not vaccinated. In the adolescent population (aged 12-17), the incidence was 10/100,000 in vaccinated population (CI95%: 5 to 45 per 100,000) compared to 20/100,000 in unvaccinated (CI95%: 6 to 79 per 100,000). The incidence of pericarditis or myocarditis in patients with COVID-19 infection was 200/100,000 people (CI95%: 114 to 306 per 100,000). The most common cause of pericarditis and myocarditis in the cohort was idiopathic/infectious (74 cases). Cases of myocarditis attributed to COVID-19 infection were more severe and had higher mortality rates compared to cases with other causes.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of pericarditis and myocarditis in patients exposed to mRNA COVID-19 vaccines was lower than in those who were not vaccinated, especially in adults.The most common cause of pericarditis and myocarditis was idiopathic/infectious, but the most frequent cause in adolescent patients was mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Cases of myocarditis due to COVID-19 infection were more severe and had greater mortality.

System and facility readiness assessment for conducting active surveillance of adverse events following immunization in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia

BACKGROUND

To help distinguish vaccine-related adverse events following immunization (AEFI) from coincidental occurrences, active vaccine pharmacovigilance (VP) prospective surveillance programs are needed. From February to May 2021, we assessed the system and facility readiness for implementing active AEFI VP surveillance in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

METHODS

Selected hospitals were assessed using a readiness assessment tool with scoring measures. The site assessment was conducted via in-person interviews within the specific departments in each hospital. We evaluated the system readiness with a desk review of AEFI guidelines, Expanded Program for Immunization Guidelines and Ethiopian Food and Drug Administration and Ethiopian Public Health Institute websites.

RESULTS

Of the hospitals in Addis Ababa, 23.1% met the criteria for our site assessment. During the system readiness assessment, we found that essential components were in place. However, rules, regulations and proclamations pertaining to AEFI surveillance were absent. Based on the tool, the three hospitals (A, B and C) scored 60.6% (94/155), 48.3% (75/155) and 40% (62/155), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Only one of three hospitals assessed in our evaluation scored >50% for readiness to implement active AEFI surveillance. We also identified the following areas for improvement to ensure successful implementation: training, making guidelines and reporting forms available and ensuring a system that accommodates paper-based and electronic-based recording systems.

COVID-19 vaccine safety in Scotland - background rates of adverse events of special interest

OBJECTIVES

Mass COVID-19 vaccination commenced in December 2020 in Scotland. Monitoring vaccine safety relies on accurate background incidence rates (IRs) for health outcomes potentially associated with vaccination. This study aimed to quantify IRs in Scotland of adverse events of special interest (AESI) potentially associated with COVID-19 vaccination.

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

IRs and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for 36 AESI were calculated retrospectively for the pre-COVID-19 pandemic period (01 January 2015-31 December 2019) and the COVID-19 pandemic period (01 April 2020-30 November 2020), with age-sex stratification, and separately by calendar month and year. Incident cases were determined using International Classification of Diseases-10th Revision (ICD-10)-coded hospitalisations.

RESULTS

Prepandemic population-wide IRs ranged from 0.4 (0.3-0.5 CIs) cases per 100,000 person-years (PYRS) for neuromyelitis optica to 478.4 (475.8-481.0 CIs) cases per 100,000 PYRS for acute renal failure. Pandemic population-wide IRs ranged from 0.3 (0.2-0.5 CIs) cases per 100,000 PYRS for Kawasaki disease to 483.4 (473.2-493.7 CIs) cases per 100,000 PYRS for acute coronary syndrome. All AESI IRs varied by age and sex. Ten AESI (acute coronary syndrome, acute myocardial infarction, angina pectoris, heart failure, multiple sclerosis, polyneuropathies and peripheral neuropathies, respiratory failure, rheumatoid arthritis and polyarthritis, seizures and vasculitis) had lower pandemic than prepandemic period IRs overall. Only deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism had a higher pandemic IR.

CONCLUSION

Lower pandemic IRs likely resulted from reduced health-seeking behaviours and healthcare provision. Higher IRs may be associated with SARS-CoV-2 infections. AESI IRs will facilitate future vaccine safety studies in Scotland.

Background rates of adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccines: A multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) analysis

BACKGROUND

The Global COVID Vaccine Safety (GCoVS) project was established in 2021 under the multinational Global Vaccine Data Network (GVDN) consortium to facilitate the rapid assessment of the safety of newly introduced vaccines. This study analyzed data from GVDN member sites on the background incidence rates of conditions designated as adverse events of special interest (AESI) for COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring.

METHODS

Eleven GVDN global sites obtained data from national or regional healthcare databases using standardized methods. Incident events of 13 pre-defined AESI were included for a pre-pandemic period (2015-19) and the first pandemic year (2020). Background incidence rates (IR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for inpatient and emergency department encounters, stratified by age and sex, and compared between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods using incidence rate ratios.

RESULTS

An estimated 197 million people contributed 1,189,652,926 person-years of follow-up time. Among inpatients in the pre-pandemic period (2015-19), generalized seizures were the most common neurological AESI (IR ranged from 22.15 [95% CI 19.01-25.65] to 278.82 [278.20-279.44] per 100,000 person-years); acute disseminated encephalomyelitis was the least common (<0.5 per 100,000 person-years at most sites). Pulmonary embolism was the most common thrombotic event (IR 45.34 [95% CI 44.85-45.84] to 93.77 [95% CI 93.46-94.08] per 100,000 person-years). The IR of myocarditis ranged from 1.60 [(95% CI 1.45-1.76) to 7.76 (95% CI 7.46-8.08) per 100,000 person-years. The IR of several AESI varied by site, healthcare setting, age and sex. The IR of some AESI were notably different in 2020 compared to 2015-19.

CONCLUSION

Background incidence of AESIs exhibited some variability across study sites and between pre-pandemic and pandemic periods. These findings will contribute to global vaccine safety surveillance and research.

Safety of Streptococcus pyogenes Vaccines: Anticipating and Overcoming Challenges for Clinical Trials and Post-Marketing Monitoring

Streptococcus pyogenes (Strep A) infections result in a vastly underestimated burden of acute and chronic disease globally. The Strep A Vaccine Global Consortium's (SAVAC's) mission is to accelerate the development of safe, effective, and affordable S. pyogenes vaccines. The safety of vaccine recipients is of paramount importance. A single S. pyogenes vaccine clinical trial conducted in the 1960s raised important safety concerns. A SAVAC Safety Working Group was established to review the safety assessment methodology and results of more recent early-phase clinical trials and to consider future challenges for vaccine safety assessments across all phases of vaccine development. No clinical or biological safety signals were detected in any of these early-phase trials in the modern era. Improvements in vaccine safety assessments need further consideration, particularly for pediatric clinical trials, large-scale efficacy trials, and preparation for post-marketing pharmacovigilance.

Vaccine safety surveillance in Kenya using GAIA standards: A feasibility assessment of existing national and subnational research and program systems

BACKGROUND

Active surveillance systems for monitoring vaccine safety among pregnant women address some of the limitations of a current passive surveillance approach utilized in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC). However, few active surveillance systems in LMIC exist. Our study assessed the feasibility of utilizing three existing data collection systems in Kenya for active surveillance of maternal immunization and to assess the applicability of Global Alignment of Immunization Safety Assessment in pregnancy (GAIA) case definitions that were initially developed for clinical trials within these systems.

METHODS

We assessed applicability of GAIA case definition for maternal Tetanus Toxoid exposure, stillbirth, low birth weight, small for gestational age, Neonatal Invasive Blood Stream Infection (NIBSI), prematurity and neonatal death in two routine web-based health information systems (Kenya EMR and DHIS-2), and a web-based population-based pregnancy research platform (ANCOV1) in Kenya.

RESULTS

All three HIS were capable of reporting selected outcomes to varying degrees of GAIA certainty. The ANCOV platform was the most robust in collecting and collating clinical data for effective maternal pharmacovigilance. The utilization of facility- and district-aggregated data limits the usefulness of DHIS-2 in pharmacovigilance as currently operationalized. While the Kenya EMR contained individual level data and meets the key considerations for effective pharmacovigilance, it was used primarily for HIV care and treatment records in a small proportion of health facilities and would require additional resources to expand to all antenatal care facilities and to link maternal and infant records.

DISCUSSION

Population-based research studies may offer a responsive short-term option for implementing maternal vaccine pharmacovigilance in LMICs. However, the foundation exists for long-term capacity building within the national health electronic data systems to provide this critical service as well as ensure participation of the country in international studies on maternal vaccine safety.

Assessing heterogeneity of electronic health-care databases: A case study of background incidence rates of venous thromboembolism

PURPOSE

Heterogeneous results from multi-database studies have been observed, for example, in the context of generating background incidence rates (IRs) for adverse events of special interest for SARS-CoV-2 vaccines. In this study, we aimed to explore different between-database sources of heterogeneity influencing the estimated background IR of venous thromboembolism (VTE).

METHODS

Through forest plots and random-effects models, we performed a qualitative and quantitative assessment of heterogeneity of VTE background IR derived from 11 databases from 6 European countries, using age and gender stratified background IR for the years 2017-2019 estimated in two studies. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the impact of selection criteria on the variability of the reported IR.

RESULTS

A total of 54 257 284 subjects were included in this study. Age-gender pooled VTE IR varied from 5 to 421/100 000 person-years and IR increased with increasing age for both genders. Wide confidence intervals (CIs) demonstrated considerable within-data-source heterogeneity. Selecting databases with similar characteristics had only a minor impact on the variability as shown in forest plots and the magnitude of the I2 statistic, which remained large. Solely including databases with primary care and hospital data resulted in a noticeable decrease in heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Large variability in IR between data sources and within age group and gender strata warrants the need for stratification and limits the feasibility of a meaningful pooled estimate. A more detailed knowledge of the data characteristics, operationalisation of case definitions and cohort population might support an informed choice of the adequate databases to calculate reliable estimates.

Active surveillance of adverse events following COVID-19 vaccines in a tertiary care hospital

Background

Vaccination is a safe and effective way to prevent disease and save lives, but it may also produce some undesirable adverse events (AEs)which may affect healthy individuals. Therefore, the monitoring of AE following immunization (AEFIs) is necessary. The objective of this study was to assess the AEs following COVID-19 vaccinations in a tertiary care hospital.

Methodology

The study was conducted as active vaccine safety surveillance for a period of 6 months among the COVID-19 vaccine beneficiaries of the study site. Active surveillance was conducted via initiating two telephone contacts. The first surveillance was conducted in 8 days and the second surveillance after 28 days of post-vaccination. All identified AEs following immunizations (AEFIs) were reported and analysed by the AEFI investigation team at the study site. The causality assessment of each identified AEFI was performed using the World Health Organization's causality assessment algorithm.

Results

A total of 2927 enrolled study population completed the study with a response rate of 80.85%. The study identified 902 AEFIs from 614 study populations with an incidence rate of 20.97%. Of which 794 and 79 AEFIs were associated with COVISHIELD™ and COVAXIN®, respectively. The majority of the events were reported among the age group of 18-29 years. Overall, only three events were serious and no deaths were reported among the study population. A total of 75.59% of events had a consistent causal association with vaccination and were categorized as vaccine product-related reactions. The study identified various factors such as gender (p = 0.019), age (p < 0.05), co-morbid status (p = 0.032) and dose number (p = 0.001) as potential predictors for development of AEFI.

Conclusion

The study identified only 0.33% of events as serious, and 99.67% of the study population recovered from the AEFIs, which reveals that COVISHIELD™ and COVAXIN® have a generally favourable safety profile. However, close monitoring is required to identify the potential signals, as the safety data from the clinical trials are limited.

Myocarditis and Pericarditis Post-mRNA COVID-19 Vaccination: Insights from a Pharmacovigilance Perspective

Concerns remain regarding the rare cardiovascular adverse events, myocarditis and pericarditis (myo/pericarditis), particularly in younger individuals following mRNA COVID-19 vaccination. Our study aimed to comprehensively assess potential safety signals related to these cardiac events following the primary and booster doses, with a specific focus on younger populations, including children as young as 6 months of age. Using the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), the United States national passive surveillance system, we conducted a retrospective pharmacovigilance study analyzing spontaneous reports of myo/pericarditis. We employed both frequentist and Bayesian methods and conducted subgroup analyses by age, sex, and vaccine dose. We observed a higher reporting rate of myo/pericarditis following the primary vaccine series, particularly in males and mainly after the second dose. However, booster doses demonstrated a lower number of reported cases, with no significant signals detected after the fourth or fifth doses. In children and young adults, we observed notable age and sex differences in the reporting of myo/pericarditis cases. Males in the 12-17 and 18-24-year-old age groups had the highest number of cases, with significant signals for both males and females after the second dose. We also identified an increased reporting for a spectrum of cardiovascular symptoms such as chest pain and dyspnea, which increased with age, and were reported more frequently than myo/pericarditis. The present study identified signals of myo/pericarditis and related cardiovascular symptoms after mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, especially among children and adolescents. These findings underline the importance for continued vaccine surveillance and the need for further studies to confirm these results and to determine their clinical implications in public health decision-making, especially for younger populations.

Reporting rates for VAERS death reports following COVID-19 vaccination, December 14, 2020-November 17, 2021

PURPOSE

Despite widely available safety information for the COVID-19 vaccines, vaccine hesitancy remains a challenge. In some cases, vaccine hesitancy may be related to concerns about the number of reports of death to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS). We aimed to provide information and context about reports of death to VAERS following COVID-19 vaccination.

METHODS

This is a descriptive study evaluating reporting rates for VAERS death reports for COVID-19 vaccine recipients in the United States between December 14, 2020, and November 17, 2021. Reporting rates were calculated as death events per million persons vaccinated and compared to expected all-cause (background) death rates.

RESULTS

9201 death events were reported for COVID-19 vaccine recipients aged 5 years and older (or age unknown). Reporting rates for death events increased with increasing age, and males generally had higher reporting rates than females. For death events within 7 days and 42 days of vaccination, respectively, observed reporting rates were lower than the expected all-cause death rates. Reporting rates for Ad26.COV2.S vaccine were generally higher than for mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, but still lower than the expected all-cause death rates. Limitations of VAERS data include potential reporting bias, missing or inaccurate information, lack of a control group, and reported diagnoses, including deaths, are not causally verified diagnoses.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting rates for death events were lower than the all-cause death rates expected in the general population. Trends in reporting rates reflected known trends in background death rates. These findings do not suggest an association between vaccination and overall increased mortality.

Value and Implementation of the Aggregate Safety Assessment Plan

Aggregate safety assessment involves evaluation of the totality of safety data to characterize the emerging safety profile of a product. The Drug Information Association-American Statistical Association Interdisciplinary Safety Evaluation scientific working group recently published an approach to developing an Aggregate Safety Assessment Plan (ASAP). Creation of an ASAP facilitates a consistent approach to safety data collection and analysis across studies and minimizes important missing data at the time of regulatory submission. A critical aspect of the ASAP is identification of the Safety Topics of Interest (STOI). The STOI, as defined in the ASAP, comprises adverse events (AEs), which have the potential to impact the benefit: risk profile of a product and typically require specialized data collection or analyses. While there are clear benefits to developing an ASAP for a drug development program, multiple concerns may be encountered with implementation. This article uses the examples of two STOIs to demonstrate the benefits and efficiencies gained with implementation of the ASAP in safety planning as well as in optimally characterizing the emerging safety profile of a product.

Background incidence rates of selected adverse events of special interest (AESI) to monitor the safety of COVID-19 vaccines

BACKGROUND

Determining background rates of medical conditions identified as adverse events of special interest (AESI) that may occur following COVID-19 vaccination is important for contextualising and investigating potential vaccine safety signals.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective population-based cohort study using linked emergency department, hospitalisation and death data for 2017 and 2018 from Australia's most populous state, New South Wales. Incident cases of select neurological conditions, arterial or venous thromboembolic conditions, secondary thrombocytopenia, myocarditis/pericarditis, and unique events of anaphylaxis and generalised convulsions were identified using internationally agreed upon diagnostic (ICD-10) codes. State-specific rates per 100,000 person-years were calculated, with further stratification by age group and sex where clinically relevant to the condition, and the number of expected cases nationally in one and 6 weeks was estimated.

RESULTS

Background rates of selected neurological conditions were low with the exception of generalised convulsions for which 1,599-1,872 cases were estimated nationally in a 1-week period in the absence of vaccination. Using a narrow case definition, rates of Guillain-Barré Syndrome (3.9 per 100,000 person-years) were higher than international rates reported elsewhere. Thromboembolic and cerebral venous sinus thrombosis event rates increased with age. Myocarditis occurred more commonly in males, and was highest in males aged 18-24 years, with an estimated 1-4 cases expected nationally in a 1-week period.

CONCLUSIONS

Using routinely collected linked healthcare data provides localised estimates of background rates of new onset or periodic AESI which enables rapid estimation of observed-versus-expected rates of events reported following COVID-19 vaccination. This Australian-specific analysis contributes AESI background rates which can be compared with those from other countries to enhance understanding of geographic variability in the frequency of specific AESI in the absence of vaccination, and can be utilised for signal detection during program implementation.

Reports of Guillain-Barré Syndrome After COVID-19 Vaccination in the United States

IMPORTANCE

Because of historical associations between vaccines and Guillain-Barré syndrome (GBS), the condition was a prespecified adverse event of special interest for COVID-19 vaccine monitoring.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate GBS reports to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and compare reporting patterns within 21 and 42 days after vaccination with Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen), BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech), and mRNA-1273 (Moderna) COVID-19 vaccines.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted using US VAERS reports submitted during December 2020 to January 2022. GBS case reports verified as meeting the Brighton Collaboration case definition for GBS in US adults after COVID-19 vaccination were included.

EXPOSURES

Receipt of the Ad26.COV2.S, BNT162b2, or mRNA-1273 COVID-19 vaccine.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Descriptive analyses of GBS case were conducted. GBS reporting rates within 21 and 42 days after Ad26.COV2.S, BNT162b2, or mRNA-1273 vaccination based on doses administered were calculated. Reporting rate ratios (RRRs) after receipt of Ad26.COV2.S vs BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273 within 21- and 42-day postvaccination intervals were calculated. Observed-to-expected (OE) ratios were estimated using published GBS background rates.

RESULTS

Among 487 651 785 COVID-19 vaccine doses, 17 944 515 doses (3.7%) were Ad26.COV2.S, 266 859 784 doses (54.7%) were BNT162b2, and 202 847 486 doses (41.6%) were mRNA-1273. Of 295 verified reports of individuals with GBS identified after COVID-19 vaccination (12 Asian [4.1%], 18 Black [6.1%], and 193 White [65.4%]; 17 Hispanic [5.8%]; 169 males [57.3%]; median [IQR] age, 59.0 [46.0-68.0] years), 275 reports (93.2%) documented hospitalization. There were 209 and 253 reports of GBS that occurred within 21 days and 42 days of vaccination, respectively. Within 21 days of vaccination, GBS reporting rates per 1 000 000 doses were 3.29 for Ad26.COV.2, 0.29 for BNT162b2, and 0.35 for mRNA-1273 administered; within 42 days of vaccination, they were 4.07 for Ad26.COV.2, 0.34 for BNT162b2, and 0.44 for mRNA-1273. GBS was more frequently reported within 21 days after Ad26.COV2.S than after BNT162b2 (RRR = 11.40; 95% CI, 8.11-15.99) or mRNA-1273 (RRR = 9.26; 95% CI, 6.57-13.07) vaccination; similar findings were observed within 42 days after vaccination (BNT162b2: RRR = 12.06; 95% CI, 8.86-16.43; mRNA-1273: RRR = 9.27; 95% CI, 6.80-12.63). OE ratios were 3.79 (95% CI, 2.88-4.88) for 21-day and 2.34 (95% CI, 1.83-2.94) for 42-day intervals after Ad26.COV2.S vaccination and less than 1 (not significant) after BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 vaccination within both postvaccination periods.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study found disproportionate reporting and imbalances after Ad26.COV2.S vaccination, suggesting that Ad26.COV2.S vaccination was associated with increased risk for GBS. No associations between mRNA COVID-19 vaccines and risk of GBS were observed.

Background rate estimations for thrombosis with thrombocytopaenia: challenges in evaluating rare safety signals following vaccination in real time during a pandemic

OBJECTIVES

During COVID-19 vaccination programmes, new safety signals have emerged for vaccines, including extremely rare cases of thrombosis with thrombocytopaenia syndrome (TTS). Background event rates before and during the pandemic are essential for contextualisation of such infrequent events. In the literature, most studies do not report an overall TTS event rate. Rather, background rates are mainly reported for subtypes of thrombotic/thromboembolic diagnoses included in the TTS clinical definition mostly by anatomical location, with reported rates for TTS subtypes varying widely. The objective of this study was to report prepandemic TTS background event rates in the general population.

METHODS

Prepandemic background TTS rates were generated via secondary data analysis using a cohort design in the IBM Truven MarketScan (now Merative MarketScan) US health insurance claims database, from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2019. Two algorithms were applied: thrombocytopaenia occurring±7 days (algorithm 1) or occurring 1 day prior to ≤14 days after the thrombotic/thromboembolic event (algorithm 2).

RESULTS

The study population derived from the MarketScan database analysis included approximately 9.8 million adults (aged ≥18 years; mean age 45 years, 52% females). Using this study population, prepandemic background TTS incidence was estimated as 9.8-11.1 per 100 000 person-years. Event rates were higher in males and increased with age. Similar patterns were observed with both algorithms.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents an estimate of aggregate prepandemic background TTS event rates including by type of thrombosis/thromboembolism and age group. The background event rates are dependent on the precision of capturing underlying TTS events in variable data sources, and the ability of electronic health records or insurance claims databases to reflect the TTS clinical definition. Differences between reported event rates demonstrate that estimating background event rates for rare, unprecedented safety events is methodologically challenging.

Background rates of adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccine safety monitoring in the United States, 2019-2020

BACKGROUND

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Biologics Effectiveness and Safety (BEST) Initiative conducts active surveillance of adverse events of special interest (AESI) after COVID-19 vaccination. Historical incidence rates (IRs) of AESI are comparators to evaluate safety.

METHODS

We estimated IRs of 17 AESI in six administrative claims databases from January 1, 2019, to December 11, 2020: Medicare claims for adults ≥ 65 years and commercial claims (Blue Health Intelligence®, CVS Health, HealthCore Integrated Research Database, IBM® MarketScan® Commercial Database, Optum pre-adjudicated claims) for adults < 65 years. IRs were estimated by sex, age, race/ethnicity (Medicare), and nursing home residency (Medicare) in 2019 and for specific periods in 2020.

RESULTS

The study included >100 million enrollees annually. In 2019, rates of most AESI increased with age. However, compared with commercially insured adults, Medicare enrollees had lower IRs of anaphylaxis (11 vs 12-19 per 100,000 person-years), appendicitis (80 vs 117-155), and narcolepsy (38 vs 41-53). Rates were higher in males than females for most AESI across databases and varied by race/ethnicity and nursing home status (Medicare). Acute myocardial infarction (Medicare) and anaphylaxis (all databases) IRs varied by season. IRs of most AESI were lower during March-May 2020 compared with March-May 2019 but returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. However, rates of Bell's palsy, Guillain-Barré syndrome, narcolepsy, and hemorrhagic/non-hemorrhagic stroke remained lower in multiple databases after May 2020, whereas some AESI (e.g., disseminated intravascular coagulation) exhibited higher rates after May 2020 compared with 2019.

CONCLUSION

AESI background rates varied by database and demographics and fluctuated in March-December 2020, but most returned to pre-pandemic levels after May 2020. It is critical to standardize demographics and consider seasonal and other trends when comparing historical rates with post-vaccination AESI rates in the same database to evaluate COVID-19 vaccine safety.

Economic impact of vaccine safety incident in Ukraine: The economic case for safety system investment

BACKGROUND

Vaccine confidence and coverage decreased following a death temporally but not causally related to measles vaccination in Ukraine in 2008. Large measles outbreaks including international exportations followed. Herein we characterize this experience including associated costs.

METHODS

Mixed-methods were used to characterize this vaccine safety incident and quantify health and economic costs. Qualitative interviews illuminate the incident, social climate, and corruption that influenced vaccine confidence in Ukraine. A literature review explored attitudes toward vaccines in the USSR and post-independence Ukraine. Infectious disease incidence was examined before and after the vaccine safety incident. An economic analysis estimated associated healthcare costs, including prevention and outbreak control measures, additional vaccination activities due to failure of the 2008 campaign, treatment costs for new cases domestically and foreign exportation, and productivity loss from treatment time and mortality for new cases.

FINDINGS

Vaccine hesitancy and distrust in government and public health programs due to corruption existed in Ukraine before the vaccine safety incident. The mishandling of the 2008 incident catalyzed the decline of vaccine confidence and prompted poor procurement decisions, leading to a drop in infant vaccination coverage, increased domestic measles cases, and exportation of measles. The estimated cost of this incident was approximately $140 million from 2008 to 2018.

INTERPRETATION

Absent a rapid and credible vaccine safety response, a coincidental death following immunization resulted in major outbreaks of measles with substantial economic costs. Adequate investments in a post-licensure safety system may help avoid similar future incidents.

Background rates of 41 adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccines in 10 European healthcare databases - an ACCESS cohort study

BACKGROUND

In May 2020, the ACCESS (The vACCine covid-19 monitoring readinESS) project was launched to prepare real-world monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines. Within this project, this study aimed to generate background incidence rates of 41 adverse events of special interest (AESI) to contextualize potential safety signals detected following administration of COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

A dynamic cohort study was conducted using a distributed data network of 10 healthcare databases from 7 European countries (Italy, Spain, Denmark, The Netherlands, Germany, France and United Kingdom) over the period 2017 to 2020. A common protocol (EUPAS37273), common data model, and common analytics programs were applied for syntactic, semantic and analytical harmonization. Incidence rates (IR) for each AESI and each database were calculated by age and sex by dividing the number of incident cases by the total person-time at risk. Age-standardized rates were pooled using random effect models according to the provenance of the events.

FINDINGS

A total number of 63,456,074 individuals were included in the study, contributing to 211.7 million person-years. A clear age pattern was observed for most AESIs, rates also varied by provenance of disease diagnosis (primary care, specialist care). Thrombosis with thrombocytopenia rates were extremely low ranging from 0.06 to 4.53/100,000 person-years for cerebral venous sinus thrombosis (CVST) with thrombocytopenia (TP) and mixed venous and arterial thrombosis with TP, respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Given the nature of the AESIs and the setting (general practitioners or hospital-based databases or both), background rates from databases that show the highest level of completeness (primary care and specialist care) should be preferred, others can be used for sensitivity. The study was designed to ensure representativeness to the European population and generalizability of the background incidence rates.

FUNDING

The project has received support from the European Medicines Agency under the Framework service contract nr EMA/2018/28/PE.

Vaccinating Children against SARS-CoV-2: A Literature Review and Survey of International Experts to Assess Safety, Efficacy and Perceptions of Vaccine Use in Children

Introduction: The balance of risks and benefits of COVID-19 vaccination in children is more complex than in adults with limited paediatric data resulting in no global consensus on whether all healthy children should be vaccinated. We sought to assess the safety, efficacy, and effectiveness of childhood vaccination against SARS-CoV-2, as well as better understanding perceptions of vaccination in parents and vaccine experts. Methods: We performed a literature review for COVID-19 vaccine safety, efficacy, effectiveness, and perceptions. We searched international safety databases for safety data and developed an electronic survey to elicit country-specific COVID-19 immunisation data, including vaccine regulations, policies, rates, and public attitudes solicited from vaccine experts. Results: Nine studies were included in the final safety analysis. Local reactions were frequently reported across all studies and vaccine types. Adverse events reported to surveillance systems tended to be non-serious, and commonly included injection site reactions and dizziness. Twenty-three studies reported immunogenicity, efficacy, and effectiveness data. There were nine randomised control trials of six different vaccine types, which showed seroconversion of neutralising antibodies in vaccinated children ranging from 88% to 100%. The vaccine efficacy for Pfizer and Moderna vaccines ranged from 88% to 100%. There were 118 survey responses representing 55 different countries. Reported vaccination rates ranged from <1% to 98%. Most respondents described “mixed opinions” regarding paediatric vaccination policies in their country. By region, a more positive public attitude towards vaccination correlated with higher vaccination rates. Discussion: In this mixed-methods review, we have found evidence that vaccination against COVID-19 in children is safe, efficacious, and effective. Overall, the combined evidence from both the literature review and survey highlights the need for further data on both the safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccinations in children.

A narrative review of vaccine pharmacovigilance during mass vaccination campaigns: Focus on myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination

Vaccines have had a tremendous impact on reducing the burden of infectious diseases; however, they have the potential to cause adverse events following immunization (AEFIs). Prelicensure clinical trials are limited in their ability to detect rare AEFIs that may occur in less than one per thousand individuals. While postmarketing surveillance systems have shown COVID-19 mRNA vaccines to be safe, they led to the identification of rare cases of myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination that were not initially detected in clinical trials. In this narrative review, we highlight concepts of vaccine pharmacovigilance during mass vaccination campaigns and compare the approaches used in the context of myocarditis and pericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination to historical examples. We describe mechanisms of passive and active surveillance, their strengths and limitations, and how they interacted to identify and characterize the safety signal of myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination. Articles were synthesized from a PubMed search using relevant keywords for articles published on vaccine surveillance systems and myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 vaccination, as well as the authors' collections of relevant publications and grey literature reports. The global experience around the identification and monitoring of myocarditis and pericarditis after COVID-19 mRNA vaccination has provided important lessons for vaccine safety surveillance and highlighted its importance in maintaining public trust in mass vaccination programmes in a pandemic context.

COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy in Denmark and Russia: A qualitative typology at the nexus of agency and health capital

Vaccination of the world population is being embraced by 184 countries as the main strategy to end the COVID-19 pandemic; vaccination rates are stalling even in countries with high vaccine availability, though. This article investigates the phenomenon of vaccine hesitancy in two such countries, the Kingdom of Denmark and the Russian Federation, through a qualitative study of the different types of hesitancy to COVID-19 vaccination programs and their underlying mechanisms. The analysis reveals a typology along the dimensions of agency and health capital: resisting hesitancy based on mistrust of authority, paralyzed hesitancy based on personal fear, informed hesitancy based on informed choice, and empowered hesitancy based on empowered choice. While the mechanisms underlying vaccine hesitancy are to a great extent comparable between the two countries, differences in population size, societal cohesion, and political culture seem to impact the prevalence and severity of types and, thereby, the outcomes of national COVID-19 vaccination programs and national campaigns for mitigating COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy. The implications of these findings extend beyond the particular context of COVID-19 and the countries studied, supporting and nuancing existing models for vaccine hesitancy, as well as providing a starting point for tailored campaigns for mitigating vaccine hesitancy.

Global safety monitoring of COVID-19 vaccines: how pharmacovigilance rose to the challenge

Pharmacovigilance (PV) came suddenly into the spotlight when several new vaccines, developed as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic, received emergency authorisation and were rolled out on a large scale in late 2020. The vaccines underwent stringent clinical trials and evaluation from regulatory authorities, but with the use of novel technology and an anticipated rapid and vast deployment of the vaccines, the importance of a well-functioning international post marketing safety surveillance system was stressed. International PV stakeholders were faced with several challenges due to the extent of the global vaccination campaign. The unprecedented volume of reports of suspected adverse events following immunization has led to the development and use of new tools. Furthermore, the collaboration between various PV stakeholders was encouraged and strengthened. PV rose to the challenges posed by the currently ongoing global COVID-19 vaccination campaign and successful adaptations were made in a short period of time. However, the pandemic has not ended yet, the vaccination campaign is far from being completed, and further challenges are anticipated. Advances made during the pandemic will be important to strengthen PV in future and ensure to advance medicines’ safety together.

COVID-19 and vaccination: myths vs science

INTRODUCTION

Several vaccines against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) have been developed since the inception of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in December 2019, at unprecedented speed. However, these rapidly developed vaccines raised many questions related to the efficacy and safety of vaccines in different communities across the globe. Various hypotheses regarding COVID-19 and its vaccines were generated, and many of them have also been answered with scientific evidence. Still, there are many myths/misinformation related to COVID-19 and its vaccines, which create hesitancy for COVID-19 vaccination, and must be addressed critically to achieve success in the battle against the pandemic.

AREA COVERED

The development of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccines against COVID-19, their safety and efficacy, and myths/misinformation relating to COVID-19 and vaccines are presented.

EXPERT OPINION

In this pandemic we have seen a global collaborative effort of researchers, governments, and industry, supported by billions of dollars in funding, have allowed the development of vaccines far more quickly than in the past. Vaccines go through rigorous testing, analysis, and evaluations in clinical settings prior to their approval, even if they are approved for emergency use. Despite the myths, vaccination represents an important strategy to get back to normality.

Tolerability and Reactogenicity Profile of mRNA SARS-Cov-2 Vaccines from a Mass Vaccination Campaign in a Tertiary Hospital: Between-Vaccine and Between-Population Prospective Observational Study (VigilVacCOVID Study)

Background

The comparative safety profile of SARS-Cov2 vaccines requires further characterization in real-world settings.

Objectives

The aim of the VigilVacCOVID study was to assess the short-term safety of BNT162b2 and mRNA-1273 during the vaccination campaign of healthcare professionals (HCPs) and solid-organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) at a hospital clinic.

Methods

We conducted an observational, prospective, single-center, post-authorization study to characterize short-term adverse reactions (ARs) after vaccination. The primary endpoint was to assess between-vaccine differences (HCPs receiving BNT162b2 or mRNA-1273) and between-population differences (HCPs and SOTRs, both receiving mRNA-1273) in the risk of any ARs. Propensity score and covariate-adjusted multivariate models were used. The key secondary endpoint was to provide a descriptive assessment of the frequencies and intensity distribution of ARs.

Results

We included 5088 HCPs and 1289 patients. mRNA-1273 showed greater reactogenicity than BNT162b2, with an odds ratio (OR) for any AR of 3.04 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.48–3.73; p value: < 0.001) and a higher frequency and intensity of reported ARs. Compared with HCPs vaccinated with mRNA-1273, SOTRs showed a lower risk of ARs (OR = 0.36; 95% CI 0.25–0.50), with fewer and less severe ARs. Age, sex, and previous SARS-CoV-2 infection were statistically significant covariates for the risk of any AR. A history of drug allergy was significant in the comparison between vaccines (BNT162b2 vs. mRNA-1273), but not in that between SOTRs and HCPs.

Conclusions

Our study shows that mRNA-1273 had greater reactogenicity than BNT162b2. Overall, both vaccines had an adequate tolerability profile. mRNA-1273 vaccination caused fewer ARs with milder severity in SOTRs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40259-022-00543-9.

Factors Influencing Background Incidence Rate Calculation: Systematic Empirical Evaluation Across an International Network of Observational Databases

Objective: Background incidence rates are routinely used in safety studies to evaluate an association of an exposure and outcome. Systematic research on sensitivity of rates to the choice of the study parameters is lacking. Materials and Methods: We used 12 data sources to systematically examine the influence of age, race, sex, database, time-at-risk, season and year, prior observation and clean window on incidence rates using 15 adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccines as an example. For binary comparisons we calculated incidence rate ratios and performed random-effect meta-analysis. Results: We observed a wide variation of background rates that goes well beyond age and database effects previously observed. While rates vary up to a factor of 1,000 across age groups, even after adjusting for age and sex, the study showed residual bias due to the other parameters. Rates were highly influenced by the choice of anchoring (e.g., health visit, vaccination, or arbitrary date) for the time-at-risk start. Anchoring on a healthcare encounter yielded higher incidence comparing to a random date, especially for short time-at-risk. Incidence rates were highly influenced by the choice of the database (varying by up to a factor of 100), clean window choice and time-at-risk duration, and less so by secular or seasonal trends. Conclusion: Comparing background to observed rates requires appropriate adjustment and careful time-at-risk start and duration choice. Results should be interpreted in the context of study parameter choices.

Safety of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in patients with Behcet’s syndrome and familial Mediterranean fever: a cross-sectional comparative study on the effects of M-RNA based and inactivated vaccine

Most of the published data relate to classical forms of rheumatic diseases (RD) and information on rare inflammatory disorders such as Behçet’s syndrome (BS) and familial Mediterranean fever (FMF) is limited. We studied the frequency of side effects and disease flares after COVID-19 vaccination with either Pfizer/BioNTech or Sinovac/CoronaVac in 256 patients with BS, 247 with FMF, and 601 with RD. Telephone interviews were conducted using a questionnaire survey in a cross-sectional design in patients with BS, FMF, and RD followed by a single university hospital. Study participants were vaccinated either with CoronaVac (BS:109, FMF: 90, and RD: 343,) or BioNTech (BS: 147, FMF: 157 and RD: 258). The majority have received double dose (BS: 94.9%, FMF 92.3% and RD: 86.2%). BioNTech ensured a significantly better efficacy than CoronaVac against COVID-19 in all patient groups (BS: 1.4% vs 10.1%; FMF: 3.2% vs 12.2%, RD:2.7% vs 6.4%). Those with at least one adverse event (AE) were significantly more frequent among those vaccinated with BioNTech than those with CoronaVac (BS: 86.4% vs 45%; FMF: 83.4% vs 53.3%; and RD: 83.3% vs 45.5%). The majority of AEs were mild to moderate and transient and this was true for either vaccine. There were also AEs that required medical attention in all study groups following CoronaVac (BS: 5.5%, FMF: 3.3%, and RD:2.9%) or BioNTech (BS: 5.4%, FMF: 1.9%, and RD: 4.7%). The main causes for medical assistance were disease flare and cardiovascular events. Patients with BS (16.0%) and FMF (17.4%) were found to flare significantly more frequently when compared to those with RD (6.0%) (p < 0.001). This was true for either vaccine. BS patients reported mainly skin-mucosa lesions; there were however, 11 (4.3%) who developed major organ attack such as uveitis, thrombosis or stroke. Flare in FMF patients were associated mainly with acute serositis with or without fever. Arthralgia/arthritis or inflammatory back pain were observed mainly in the RD group. Our study demonstrates that BS and FMF patients vaccinated with either CoronaVac or BioNTech demonstrated similar AE profile and frequency compared to RD patients. AEs that required physician consultation or hospitalization occurred in all study groups after either CoronaVac or BioNTech. Increased frequency of flares in BS and FMF compared to that seen in RD might reflect defects in innate immunity and deserves further investigation. Caution should be required when monitoring these patients after vaccination.

Background incidence rates of adverse events of special interest related to COVID-19 vaccines in Ontario, Canada, 2015 to 2020, to inform COVID-19 vaccine safety surveillance

Background

Background incidence rates are critical in pharmacovigilance to facilitate identification of vaccine safety signals. We estimated background incidence rates of 11 adverse events of special interest related to COVID-19 vaccines in Ontario, Canada.

Methods

We conducted a population-based retrospective observational study using linked health administrative databases for hospitalizations and emergency department visits among Ontario residents. We estimated incidence rates of Bell’s palsy, idiopathic thrombocytopenia, febrile convulsions, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, myocarditis, pericarditis, Kawasaki disease, Guillain-Barré syndrome, transverse myelitis, acute myocardial infarction, and anaphylaxis during five pre-pandemic years (2015–2019) and 2020.

Results

The average annual population was 14 million across all age groups with 51% female. The pre-pandemic mean annual rates per 100,000 population during 2015–2019 were 191 for acute myocardial infarction, 43.9 for idiopathic thrombocytopenia, 28.8 for anaphylaxis, 27.8 for Bell’s palsy, 25.0 for febrile convulsions, 22.8 for acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, 11.3 for myocarditis/pericarditis, 8.7 for pericarditis, 2.9 for myocarditis, 2.0 for Kawasaki disease, 1.9 for Guillain-Barré syndrome, and 1.7 for transverse myelitis. Females had higher rates of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, transverse myelitis and anaphylaxis while males had higher rates of myocarditis, pericarditis, and Guillain-Barré syndrome. Bell’s palsy, acute disseminated encephalomyelitis, and Guillain-Barré syndrome increased with age. The mean rates of myocarditis and/or pericarditis increased with age up to 79 years; males had higher rates than females: from 12 to 59 years for myocarditis and ≥12 years for pericarditis. Febrile convulsions and Kawasaki disease were predominantly childhood diseases and generally decreased with age.

Conclusions

Our estimated background rates will permit estimating numbers of expected events for these conditions and facilitate detection of potential safety signals following COVID-19 vaccination.

Post COVID-19 Vaccination Acute Disseminated Encephalomyelitis: A Case Report

INTRODUCTION

A 67-year-old female with no significant past medical history presented to the critical care department with symptoms of encephalopathy.

CASE PRESENTATION

The patient's Main Concerns and the Important Clinical Findings: The patient had a history of COVID -19 vaccination (recombinant ChAdOX1 nCoV-19) 14 days prior to the symptoms. She underwent an MRI of the brain and cervical spine and a lumbar puncture. The Primary Diagnoses, Interventions, and Outcomes: The patient was examined and sent for an MRI of the brain and cervical spine, followed by extensive blood and CSF investigations to rule out any infective, paraneoplastic, connective tissue disorder, or inflammatory disorder. The patient was given steroids, and a good response was reported. The primary diagnosis was made as vaccine-induced ADEM.

CONCLUSION

The clinical exam, location, sparse contrast enhancement, and CSF findings were all consistent with an acute demyelinating event, and the history of vaccination, together with the clinical situation, was found to be favourable for the development of acute disseminated encephalomyelitis.

Cardiovascular and haematological events post COVID-19 vaccination: A systematic review

Since COVID‐19 took a strong hold around the globe causing considerable morbidity and mortality, a lot of effort was dedicated to manufacturing effective vaccines against SARS‐CoV‐2. Many questions have since been raised surrounding the safety of the vaccines, and a lot of media attention to certain side effects. This caused a state of vaccine hesitancy that may prove problematic in the global effort to control the virus. This review was undertaken with the aim of putting together all the reported cardiovascular and haematological events post COVID‐19 vaccination in published literature and to suggest possible mechanisms to explain these rare phenomena.

Background incidence rates of hospitalisations and emergency department visits for thromboembolic and coagulation disorders in Ontario, Canada for COVID-19 vaccine safety assessment: a population-based retrospective observational study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate background rates of selected thromboembolic and coagulation disorders in Ontario, Canada.

DESIGN

Population-based retrospective observational study using linked health administrative databases. Records of hospitalisations and emergency department visits were searched to identify cases using International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, 10th Revision, Canada diagnostic codes.

PARTICIPANTS

All Ontario residents.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidence rates of ischaemic stroke, intracerebral haemorrhage, subarachnoid haemorrhage, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, idiopathic thrombocytopaenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation and cerebral venous thrombosis during five prepandemic years (2015-2019) and 2020.

RESULTS

The average annual population was 14 million with 51% female. The mean annual rates per 100 000 population during 2015-2019 were 127.1 (95% CI 126.2 to 127.9) for ischaemic stroke, 22.0 (95% CI 21.6 to 22.3) for intracerebral haemorrhage, 9.4 (95% CI 9.2 to 9.7) for subarachnoid haemorrhage, 86.8 (95% CI 86.1 to 87.5) for deep vein thrombosis, 63.7 (95% CI 63.1 to 64.3) for pulmonary embolism, 6.1 (95% CI 5.9 to 6.3) for idiopathic thrombocytopaenia, 1.6 (95% CI 1.5 to 1.7) for disseminated intravascular coagulation, and 1.5 (95% CI 1.4 to 1.6) for cerebral venous thrombosis. Rates were lower in 2020 than during the prepandemic years for ischaemic stroke, deep vein thrombosis and idiopathic thrombocytopaenia. Rates were generally consistent over time, except for pulmonary embolism, which increased from 57.1 to 68.5 per 100 000 between 2015 and 2019. Rates were higher for females than males for subarachnoid haemorrhage, pulmonary embolism and cerebral venous thrombosis, and vice versa for ischaemic stroke and intracerebral haemorrhage. Rates increased with age for most of these conditions, but idiopathic thrombocytopaenia demonstrated a bimodal distribution with incidence peaks at 0-19 years and ≥60 years.

CONCLUSIONS

Our estimated background rates help contextualise observed events of these potential adverse events of special interest and to detect potential safety signals related to COVID-19 vaccines.

COVID-19 Vaccination in Pregnancy, Paediatrics, Immunocompromised Patients, and Persons with History of Allergy or Prior SARS-CoV-2 Infection: Overview of Current Recommendations and Pre- and Post-Marketing Evidence for Vaccine Efficacy and Safety

To date, four vaccines have been authorised for emergency use and under conditional approval by the European Medicines Agency to prevent COVID-19: Comirnaty, COVID-19 Vaccine Janssen, Spikevax (previously COVID-19 Vaccine Moderna) and Vaxzevria (previously COVID-19 Vaccine AstraZeneca). Although the benefit-risk profile of these vaccines was proven to be largely favourable in the general population, evidence in special cohorts initially excluded from the pivotal trials, such as pregnant and breastfeeding women, children/adolescents, immunocompromised people and persons with a history of allergy or previous SARS-CoV-2 infection, is still limited. In this narrative review, we critically overview pre- and post-marketing evidence on the potential benefits and risks of marketed COVID-19 vaccines in the above-mentioned special cohorts. In addition, we summarise the recommendations of the scientific societies and regulatory agencies about COVID-19 primary prevention in the same vaccinee categories.

Anaphylaxis rates associated with COVID-19 vaccines are comparable to those of other vaccines

We retrieved data on 8940 anaphylaxis cases post-COVID-19 vaccination from the US Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System and the European EudraVigilance from week 52/2020 through week 31/2021 and compared them with those of other vaccines. Overall, 837,830,000 COVID-19 vaccine doses were delivered in the US and Europe during the study period, for which the vaccine name was known. The mean anaphylaxis rate was estimated at 10.67 cases per 10⁶ doses of COVID-19 vaccines (range: 7.99-19.39 cases per 10⁶ doses depending on the vaccine). COVID-19 vaccines ranked fifth in reported anaphylaxis rates, behind rabies, tick-borne encephalitis, measles-mumps-rubella-varicella, and human papillomavirus vaccines (70.77, 20, 19.8, and 13.65 cases per 10⁶ vaccine doses, respectively). COVID-19 vaccines are within the range of anaphylaxis rates reported across several common vaccines in these two passive reporting systems. These data should be communicated to reassure the general population about the safety profile of COVID-19 vaccines.

Myocarditis and Pericarditis following COVID-19 Vaccination: Inequalities in Age and Vaccine Types

An increasing number of myocarditis/pericarditis incidences has been reported after coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) vaccination in adolescents and young adults. This study was designed to investigate the incidence rate of-and risk for-myocarditis and pericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination in the United States according to age and vaccine type. This study used the Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) from 11 December 2020 to 13 August 2021. A population-based data mining approach was performed based on the reporting odds ratio (ROR). Adverse events of myocarditis and pericarditis following COVID-19 vaccination were rare, with an incidence rate of 5.98 (95% CI = 5.73-6.24) cases per million doses administered. The incidence rate was higher in adolescents and after the administration of the second dose of messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccines. Overall, two mRNA vaccines were significantly associated with increased risks for myocarditis/pericarditis (mRNA-1273 (Moderna): ROR = 2.91, 95% CI = 2.21-3.83; BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech): ROR = 5.37, 95% CI = 4.10-7.04) compared to all other vaccines from VAERS. The viral vector vaccine of Ad26.COV2.S (Janssen) was not associated with signals of myocarditis/pericarditis (ROR = 1.39; 95% CI = 0.99-1.97). This study found increased risks for myocarditis/pericarditis following mRNA COVID-19 vaccines. For patients at high risk for myocarditis/pericarditis or with myocardial injuries, the viral vector vaccine may be an alternative for consideration.

Attitudes to Being Vaccinated Against COVID-19: A Survey of People With Epilepsy in China

Objective: We conducted a survey to assess vaccination coverage, vaccination willingness, and variables associated with vaccination hesitancy to provide evidence on coronavirus disease (COVID-19) vaccination strategies.

Methods: This anonymous questionnaire study conducted a multicenter, cross-sectional survey of outpatients and inpatients with epilepsy (PWE) registered in epilepsy clinics, in 2021, in 10 hospitals in seven cities of Shandong Province.

Results: A total of 600 questionnaires were distributed, and 557 valid questionnaires were returned. A total of 130 people were vaccinated against COVID-19. Among 427 unvaccinated participants, 69.32% (296/427) were willing to receive the COVID-19 vaccine in the future, and the remaining 30.68% (131/427) were unwilling to receive vaccination. Most (89.9%) of the participants believed that the role of vaccination was crucial in response to the spread of COVID-19. A significant association was found between willingness to receive the COVID-19 vaccine and the following variables: age, marital status, level of education, occupation, residence, seizure type, and seizure control after antiepileptic drug therapy. It is noteworthy that education level, living in urban areas, and seizure freedom were significantly related to willingness to receive COVID-19 vaccination.

Conclusions: Vaccination is a key measure for the prevention and control of COVID-19, and most PWE are willing to be vaccinated. Vaccine safety, effectiveness, and accessibility are essential in combatting vaccine hesitation and increasing vaccination rates.

Tracking the progress in COVID-19 and vaccine safety research - a comprehensive bibliometric analysis of publications indexed in Scopus database

INTRODUCTION

COVID-19 pandemic public health emergency is one of the worse disease outbreaks in the history of infectious disease. The consequence has resulted in over 4 million deaths globally. Therefore, a more in-depth understanding of the dynamics of the disease, vaccine development, and safety has become crucial for the disease eradication.

OBJECTIVE

The study adopted bibliometric analysis to identify the global contribution in COVID-19 and Vaccine Safety and analyzed the current status, development, and research hotspots to reference for future research directions.

METHODS

Studies published between January 1, 2019 and July 11, 2021 were retrieved from the Scopus database. Data analysis and visualization were conducted using VOSviewer ver 1.6.6, Bibliometrix app. (Using R).

RESULTS

A total of 1827 publications with 12.14 average citations per document were identified. These publications were published in 796 journals by 10,243 authors (with 5.61 authors per document) from 80 countries/regions. About 33.75% of the researches were from the developed countries. The USA, China, and India were top contributors for scientific research on COVID-19 and vaccine safety. The "Vaccine" is the most productive journal with 58 articles. Li Y, NA NA, and Liu X were the top three prolific authors. Furthermore, "Human," "Coronavirus disease 2019," and "Drug safety," were the most common frontier topics.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analysis highlights the characteristics of the most influential articles on COVID-19 related to vaccine safety. The findings provided valuable insight into the scientific research progress in this domain and suggest scaling-up research and information dissemination on COVID-19 and vaccine safety.

Investigating the Links Between Vaccination Against COVID-19 and Public Attitudes Toward Protective Countermeasures: Implications for Public Health

The COVID-19 pandemic caused by the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, is spreading globally at an unprecedented rate. To protect the world against this devastating catastrophe, vaccines for SARS-CoV-2 have been produced following consistent clinical trials. However, the durability of a protective immune response due to vaccination has not been confirmed. Moreover, COVID-19 vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is not 100% guaranteed, as new variants arise due to mutations. Consequently, health officials are pleading with the public to take extra precautions against the virus and continue wearing masks, wash hands, and observe physical distancing even after vaccination. The current research collected data from 4,540 participants (1,825 vaccinated and 2,715 not vaccinated) in China to analyze this phenomenon empirically. The propensity score matching (PSM) model is employed to analyze the impact of vaccination against COVID-19 on participants' attitudes toward protective countermeasures. The findings showed that gender, age, education level, occupation risk, individual health risk perception, public health risk perception, social responsibility, peer effect, and government supervision are the main drivers for participants to be vaccinated with COVID-19's vaccines. The results further show that vaccination lessened participants' frequency of hand washing by 1.75 times and their compliance frequency intensity of observing physical distancing by 1.24 times. However, the rate of mask-wearing did not reduce significantly, implying that China's main countermeasure of effective mask-wearing effectively controls COVID-19. Moreover, the findings indicate that a reduction in the frequency of hand washing and observing physical distance could cause a resurgence of COVID-19. In conclusion, factors leading to the eradication of SARS-CoV-2 from the world are complex to be achieved, so the exploration of COVID-19 vaccination and people's attitude toward protective countermeasures may provide insights for policymakers to encourage vaccinated people to follow protective health measures and help in completely defeating the COVID-19 from the globe.

Characterising the background incidence rates of adverse events of special interest for covid-19 vaccines in eight countries: multinational network cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the background incidence rates of 15 prespecified adverse events of special interest (AESIs) associated with covid-19 vaccines.

DESIGN

Multinational network cohort study.

SETTING

Electronic health records and health claims data from eight countries: Australia, France, Germany, Japan, the Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, mapped to a common data model.

PARTICIPANTS

126 661 070 people observed for at least 365 days before 1 January 2017, 2018, or 2019 from 13 databases.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Events of interests were 15 prespecified AESIs (non-haemorrhagic and haemorrhagic stroke, acute myocardial infarction, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, anaphylaxis, Bell's palsy, myocarditis or pericarditis, narcolepsy, appendicitis, immune thrombocytopenia, disseminated intravascular coagulation, encephalomyelitis (including acute disseminated encephalomyelitis), Guillain-Barré syndrome, and transverse myelitis). Incidence rates of AESIs were stratified by age, sex, and database. Rates were pooled across databases using random effects meta-analyses and classified according to the frequency categories of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences.

RESULTS

Background rates varied greatly between databases. Deep vein thrombosis ranged from 387 (95% confidence interval 370 to 404) per 100 000 person years in UK CPRD GOLD data to 1443 (1416 to 1470) per 100 000 person years in US IBM MarketScan Multi-State Medicaid data among women aged 65 to 74 years. Some AESIs increased with age. For example, myocardial infarction rates in men increased from 28 (27 to 29) per 100 000 person years among those aged 18-34 years to 1400 (1374 to 1427) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in US Optum electronic health record data. Other AESIs were more common in young people. For example, rates of anaphylaxis among boys and men were 78 (75 to 80) per 100 000 person years in those aged 6-17 years and 8 (6 to 10) per 100 000 person years in those older than 85 years in Optum electronic health record data. Meta-analytic estimates of AESI rates were classified according to age and sex.

CONCLUSION

This study found large variations in the observed rates of AESIs by age group and sex, showing the need for stratification or standardisation before using background rates for safety surveillance. Considerable population level heterogeneity in AESI rates was found between databases.

Characterizing the incidence of adverse events of special interest for COVID-19 vaccines across eight countries: a multinational network cohort study

BACKGROUND

As large-scale immunization programs against COVID-19 proceed around the world, safety signals will emerge that need rapid evaluation. We report population-based, age- and sex-specific background incidence rates of potential adverse events of special interest (AESI) in eight countries using thirteen databases.

METHODS

This multi-national network cohort study included eight electronic medical record and five administrative claims databases from Australia, France, Germany, Japan, Netherlands, Spain, the United Kingdom, and the United States, mapped to a common data model. People observed for at least 365 days before 1 January 2017, 2018, or 2019 were included. We based study outcomes on lists published by regulators: acute myocardial infarction, anaphylaxis, appendicitis, Bell's palsy, deep vein thrombosis, disseminated intravascular coagulation, encephalomyelitis, Guillain-Barre syndrome, hemorrhagic and non-hemorrhagic stroke, immune thrombocytopenia, myocarditis/pericarditis, narcolepsy, pulmonary embolism, and transverse myelitis. We calculated incidence rates stratified by age, sex, and database. We pooled rates across databases using random effects meta-analyses. We classified meta-analytic estimates into Council of International Organizations of Medical Sciences categories: very common, common, uncommon, rare, or very rare.

FINDINGS

We analysed 126,661,070 people. Rates varied greatly between databases and by age and sex. Some AESI (e.g., myocardial infarction, Guillain-Barre syndrome) increased with age, while others (e.g., anaphylaxis, appendicitis) were more common in young people. As a result, AESI were classified differently according to age. For example, myocardial infarction was very rare in children, rare in women aged 35-54 years, uncommon in men and women aged 55-84 years, and common in those aged ≥85 years.

INTERPRETATION

We report robust baseline rates of prioritised AESI across 13 databases. Age, sex, and variation between databases should be considered if background AESI rates are compared to event rates observed with COVID-19 vaccines.