Evaluation of safety of A/H1N1 pandemic vaccination during pregnancy: cohort study

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.

Maternal vaccination to prevent adverse pregnancy outcomes: An underutilized molecular immunological intervention?

Adverse pregnancy outcomes including maternal mortality, stillbirth, preterm birth, intrauterine growth restriction cause millions of deaths each year. More effective interventions are urgently needed. Maternal immunization could be one such intervention protecting the mother and newborn from infection through its pathogen-specific effects. However, many adverse pregnancy outcomes are not directly linked to the infectious pathogens targeted by existing maternal vaccines but rather are linked to pathological inflammation unfolding during pregnancy. The underlying pathogenesis driving such unfavourable outcomes have only partially been elucidated but appear to relate to altered immune regulation by innate as well as adaptive immune responses, ultimately leading to aberrant maternal immune activation. Maternal immunization, like all immunization, impacts the immune system beyond pathogen-specific immunity. This raises the possibility that maternal vaccination could potentially be utilised as a pathogen-agnostic immune modulatory intervention to redirect abnormal immune trajectories towards a more favourable phenotype providing pregnancy protection. In this review we describe the epidemiological evidence surrounding this hypothesis, along with the mechanistic plausibility and present a possible path forward to accelerate addressing the urgent need of adverse pregnancy outcomes.

The risk of major structural birth defects associated with seasonal influenza vaccination during pregnancy: A population-based cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Seasonal inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) is routinely recommended during pregnancy to protect both mothers and infants from complications following influenza infection. While previous studies have evaluated the risk of major structural birth defects in infants associated with prenatal administration of monovalent pandemic IIV, fewer studies have evaluated the risk associated with prenatal seasonal IIV.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based cohort study of 125,866 singleton births between 2012 and 2016 in Western Australia. Birth registrations were linked to the state's registers for congenital anomalies and a state prenatal vaccination database. We estimated prevalence ratios (PR) of any major structural birth defect and defects by organ system. Vaccinated pregnancies were defined as those with a record of IIV in the first trimester. Inverse probability treatment weighting factored for baseline probability for vaccination. A Bonferroni correction was applied to account for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

About 3.9% of births had a major structural birth defect. Seasonal IIV exposure during the first trimester was not associated with diagnosis of any major structural birth defect diagnosed within 1 month of birth (PR 0.98, 95% CI: 0.77, 1.28) or within 6 years of life (PR 1.02, 95% CI: 0.78, 1.35). We identified no increased risk in specific birth defects associated with seasonal IIV.

CONCLUSION

Based on registry data for up to 6 years of follow-up, results suggest there is no association between maternal influenza vaccination and risk of major structural birth defects. These results support the safety of seasonal IIV administration during pregnancy.

Flu and pertussis vaccination during pregnancy in Geneva during the COVID-19 pandemic: A multicentric, prospective, survey-based study

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus in Europe: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prevalence Studies

Background

Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) is defined as the type of hyperglycemia diagnosed for the first-time during pregnancy, presenting with intermediate glucose levels between normal levels for pregnancy and glucose levels diagnostic of diabetes in the non-pregnant state. We aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze studies of prevalence of GDM in European countries at regional and sub-regional levels, according to age, trimester, body weight, and GDM diagnostic criteria.

Methods

Systematic search was conducted in five databases to retrieve studies from 2014 to 2019 reporting the prevalence of GDM in Europe. Two authors have independently screened titles and abstracts and full text according to eligibility using Covidence software. A random-effects model was used to quantify weighted GDM prevalence estimates. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute criteria was used to assess the risk of bias.

Results

From the searched databases, 133 research reports were deemed eligible and included in the meta-analysis. The research reports yielded 254 GDM-prevalence studies that tested 15,572,847 pregnant women between 2014 and 2019. The 133 research reports were from 24 countries in Northern Europe (44.4%), Southern Europe (27.1%), Western Europe (24.1%), and Eastern Europe (4.5%). The overall weighted GDM prevalence in the 24 European countries was estimated at 10.9% (95% CI: 10.0-11.8, I2 : 100%). The weighted GDM prevalence was highest in the Eastern Europe (31.5%, 95% CI: 19.8-44.6, I2 : 98.9%), followed by in Southern Europe (12.3%, 95% CI: 10.9-13.9, I2 : 99.6%), Western Europe (10.7%, 95% CI: 9.5-12.0, I2 : 99.9%), and Northern Europe (8.9%, 95% CI: 7.9-10.0, I2 : 100). GDM prevalence was 2.14-fold increased in pregnant women with maternal age ≥30 years (versus 15-29 years old), 1.47-fold if the diagnosis was made in the third trimester (versus second trimester), and 6.79- fold in obese and 2.29-fold in overweight women (versus normal weight).

Conclusions

In Europe, GDM is significant in pregnant women, around 11%, with the highest prevalence in pregnant women of Eastern European countries (31.5%). Findings have implications to guide vigilant public health awareness campaigns about the risk factors associated with developing GDM.

Systematic Review Registration

PROSPERO [https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/], identifier CRD42020161857.

Global Perspectives on Immunization During Pregnancy and Priorities for Future Research and Development: An International Consensus Statement

Immunization during pregnancy has been recommended in an increasing number of countries. The aim of this strategy is to protect pregnant women and infants from severe infectious disease, morbidity and mortality and is currently limited to tetanus, inactivated influenza, and pertussis-containing vaccines. There have been recent advancements in the development of vaccines designed primarily for use in pregnant women (respiratory syncytial virus and group B Streptococcus vaccines). Although there is increasing evidence to support vaccination in pregnancy, important gaps in knowledge still exist and need to be addressed by future studies. This collaborative consensus paper provides a review of the current literature on immunization during pregnancy and highlights the gaps in knowledge and a consensus of priorities for future research initiatives, in order to optimize protection for both the mother and the infant.

Adjuvanted-influenza vaccination in patients infected with HIV: a systematic review and meta-analysis of immunogenicity and safety

Adjuvanted-influenza vaccination is an efficient method for enhancing the immunogenicity of influenza split-virus vaccines for preventing influenza. However, the medical community's understanding of its performance in patients infected with HIV remains limited. To identify the advantages, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis with randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort and case-control studies that have the immunogenicity and safety of influenza vaccines in patients infected with HIV as outcomes. We searched six different databases, and 1698 patients infected with HIV in 11 studies were included. Statistical analysis was performed to calculate the pooled standardized mean differences (SMD) or relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Regarding immunogenicity, the pooled SMD of GMT (Geometric mean titer) for A/H1N1 was 0.61 (95%CI (0.40,0.82)), the pooled RR of seroconversion was 1.34 (95%CI (0.91,1.98)) for the H1N1 vaccine, 1.27(95%CI (0.64,2.52)) for the H3N2 vaccine, 1.19(95%CI (0.97,1.46)) for the B-type influenza vaccine. The pooled RR of seroprotection was 1.61 (95%CI (1.00,2.58)) for the H1N1 vaccine, 1.06 (95%CI(0.83,1.35)) for the H3N2 vaccine, and 1.13(95%CI(0.91,1.41)) for the B-type vaccine. Adjuvanted-influenza vaccination showed good general tolerability in patients infected with HIV, with the only significant increase being the rate of local pain at the injection site (RR = 2.03, 95%CI (1.06,3.86)). In conclusion, all studies evaluating injected adjuvanted influenza vaccination among patients infected with HIV showed acceptable levels of safety and immunogenicity.

Maternal tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) and influenza immunization: an overview

BACKGROUND

Maternal tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis (Tdap) and influenza immunization for women during pregnancy (the so-called "maternal immunization") has been introduced in several countries, and recently also in Italy, to protect mother and fetus during pregnancy, infant in his first months of life and mother during postpartum period. However, very low vaccination coverage rates have been reached due to several variables.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on PubMed and Embase, including any experimental or observational studies, to assesses existing evidence on the effectiveness, efficacy, safety and optimal timing of administration of Tdap and influenza immunization in pregnancy for mothers and their infants. The search was finalized in August 2019.

RESULTS

Reviewing the literature, we identified only a few studies that, among several maternal and infant outcomes, found sporadic significant associations with maternal influenza immunization and even less with Tdap immunization. Moreover, most of the authors of these studies explained these findings as a result of residual confounding effect. The effectiveness of maternal influenza immunization is more complicated to prove than the effectiveness of Tdap immunization because of several reasons. Not all nations recommend and offer vaccines in the same weeks of pregnancy and this one manifests the complexity in defining the best timing for Tdap or influenza immunization.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety of maternal Tdap or influenza immunization is supported by the evidence so far, however, regular surveillance should be maintained, especially with regard to the influenza vaccine that changes in formulation each year. There is a need to optimize the timing of vaccination in pregnancy and to have a national system of detection of maternal immunization in each country.

Trivalent influenza vaccination randomized control trial of pregnant women and adverse fetal outcomes

•

A two-year randomized controlled trial of seasonal IIV3.

•

Over 2000 mothers in South Africa, from March 2011 until post 2012 influenza season.

•

Birth outcomes investigated were fetal death, SGA, birth weight and prematurity.

•

Vaccine demonstrated no appreciable impact of maternal IIV3 immunization.

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association of influenza vaccine during pregnancy and adverse fetal outcomes. Preventing fetal death, low birth weight, small for gestational age birth and preterm birth are important potential effects of antenatal maternal influenza immunization for which there are conflicting data.

Materials and methods

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine was conducted in South Africa from March 2011 until after the 2012 influenza season when the infants born had reached the age of 24 weeks. Mothers were administered the vaccine or placebo during pregnancy at a gestation of 20 to 36 weeks. A comparison of rates of fetal death, low birth weight, small for gestational age birth, and preterm birth, between vaccinated and placebo groups was made. Fetal outcome differences between the groups were measured using Student’s t-tests, vaccine efficacy with 95% confidence intervals, and Poisson regression for incidence rates. All analyses except fetal death excluded mothers who were administered vaccine or placebo after 34 weeks gestational age.

Results

There were 2116 HIV-uninfected pregnant women age 18 to 38 years in the trial; 2005 infants were born to mothers where vaccine or placebo had been administered ≥ 14 days prior to delivery, and there were 6 miscarriages and 23 stillbirths. There was no significant vaccine efficacy (with [95% confidence interval]) on fetal death (−21.2% [−150.8, 41.4]), low birth weight (−11.1% [−42.3, 12.5]), small for gestational age birth (−9.9% [−35.6, 11.0]), or preterm birth (−21.3% [−60.5, 8.3]). Neither was vaccine efficacy demonstrated when the analysis was restricted to infants of mothers who were exposed to an influenza season (1832 outcomes available).

Conclusion

We did not find a beneficial effect of trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine during pregnancy on adverse fetal outcomes.

Active surveillance for safety monitoring of seasonal influenza vaccines in Italy, 2015/2016 season

BACKGROUND

Surveillance for adverse events following immunization is an important component of any national immunization programme because it is critical to assessing the safety of vaccines and to detecting potentially rare and severe adverse events and responding in a timely manner. We conducted an enhanced active surveillance aimed at assessing the safety of flu vaccines in the 2015-2016 season in Italy. The study was targeted to the population groups for which the seasonal vaccine is recommended in Italy.

METHODS

During the study period, a total of 3213 individuals receiving seasonal influenza vaccination were registered on the web-based platform. Any adverse events experienced after 7 days from vaccination by individuals aged six months or more were collected through a telephone interview or by a web-based self-administered questionnaire. All individuals experiencing at least one event during the 7 days of follow-up were contacted for follow-up to 60 days.

RESULTS

Overall, 854 events were reported: 845 events (26%) after administration of the first dose and 9 (12%) after the second dose. The majority of adverse events reported after 7 days from the first dose were of little clinical importance, and most involved local symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Our data, even though the number of vaccinated individuals was smaller than expected, is consistent with the safety of influenza vaccines in Italy during the 2015-2016 season regarding the most common adverse events. Further efforts are needed to obtain sufficient power to study rarer adverse events. Active monitoring and systematic studies to test generated signals and hypotheses are crucial to intensify awareness among the public and professionals with regard to the safety of vaccines.

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.

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%).

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.

Vaccines in pregnancy: The dual benefit for pregnant women and infants

Maternal immunization has the potential to reduce the burden of infectious diseases in the pregnant woman and her infant. Many countries now recommend immunization against influenza at any stage of pregnancy and against pertussis in the third trimester. Despite evidence of the safety and effectiveness of these vaccines when administered during pregnancy, uptake generally remains low for influenza and moderate for pertussis vaccine. Enhancing confidence in both immunization providers and pregnant women by increasing the evidence-base for the safety and effectiveness of vaccines during pregnancy, improving communication and access by incorporating immunization into standard models of antenatal care are likely to improve uptake. Developing a framework for implementation of vaccines for pregnant women which is cognizant of local and national cultural, epidemiological, behavioral and societal factors will enable a smooth transition and high uptake for new vaccines currently in development for pregnant women.

Report of the WHO technical consultation on the effect of maternal influenza and influenza vaccination on the developing fetus: Montreal, Canada, September 30-October 1, 2015

In 2012, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a position paper on influenza vaccination recommending that pregnant women have the highest priority for seasonal vaccination in countries where the initiation or expansion of influenza immunization programs is under consideration. Although the primary goal of the WHO recommendation is to prevent influenza illness in pregnant women, the potential benefits of maternal immunization in protecting young infants are also recognized. The extent to which maternal influenza vaccination may prevent adverse birth outcomes such as preterm birth or small-for-gestational-age birth, however, is unclear as available studies are in disagreement. To inform WHO about the empirical evidence relating to possible benefits of influenza vaccination on birth outcomes, a consultation of experts was held in Montreal, Canada, September 30-October 1, 2015. Presentations and discussions covered a broad range of issues, including influenza virus infection during pregnancy and its effect on the health of the mother and the fetus, possible biological mechanisms for adverse birth outcomes following maternal influenza illness, evidence on birth outcomes following influenza illness during pregnancy, evidence from both observational studies and randomized controlled trials on birth outcomes following influenza vaccination of pregnant women, and methodological issues. This report provides an overview of the presentations, discussions and conclusions.

Influenza immunization during pregnancy: Benefits for mother and infant

The serious consequences of influenza infection during pregnancy have been recognized for almost a century. In this article, we reviewed the evidence on the immunogenicity, safety and impact of maternal influenza immunization for both mother and child. After vaccination, pregnant women have similar protective titers of anti-influenza antibodies as non-pregnant women, demonstrating that pregnancy does not alter the trivalent inactivated influenza vaccine immune response. Studies from the United States, Europe and resource-constrained regions demonstrate that maternal vaccination is associated with increased anti-influenza antibody concentrations and protection in the newborn child as well as the immunized mother. Given the acceptable safety profile of influenza vaccines and the World Health Organization's recommendation for its use in pregnant women, maternal vaccination with inactivated influenza vaccine is a cost-effective approach to decrease influenza disease in newborns. However, as seen for influenza immunization in the elderly, the protective efficacy of current inactivated vaccines in protection of newborns is 50% at best, indicating significant room for vaccine improvement, which could potentially be achieved by addition of a safe and effective adjuvant. Thus, global deployment of inactivated influenza immunization during pregnancy would have substantial and measurable health benefits for mothers and their newborns.

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 Influenza Vaccination and Risk for Congenital Malformations: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically summarize the literature on maternal influenza vaccination and the risk for congenital malformations using the methodology of meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases (up to December 2014) as well as ClinicalTrials.gov (May 2015) and references of relevant articles were searched. The search strategy included combinations of the terms "influenza," "vaccin*," "pregnan*," "safe*," "adverse," "congenital," "malformation," "defect," and "anomal*."

METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION

Eligible studies examined the association between antepartum or preconceptional maternal immunization with inactivated influenza vaccines (seasonal trivalent or monovalent H1N1) and the risk for congenital malformations. Studies with no or inappropriate control group (comparison with population background rates or other vaccine types) were excluded.

TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS

The risk for congenital anomalies after influenza vaccination was examined in 15 studies: 14 cohorts (events per vaccinated compared with unvaccinated: 859/32,774 [2.6%] compared with 7,644/245,314 [3.1%]) and one case-control study (vaccinated per cases compared with controls: 1,351/3,618 [37.3%] compared with 511/1,225 [41.7%]). Eight studies reported on first-trimester immunization (events per vaccinated compared with unvaccinated: 258/4,733 [5.4%] compared with 6,470/196,054 [3.3%]). No association was found between congenital defects and influenza vaccination at any trimester of pregnancy (odds ratio [OR] 0.96, 95% confidence interval 0.86-1.07; 15 studies; I2=36) or at the first trimester (OR 1.03, 0.91-1.18; eight studies; I2=0). When assessing only major malformations, no increased risk was detected after immunization at any trimester (OR 0.99, 0.88-1.11; 12 studies; I2=31.5) or at the first trimester (OR 0.98, 0.83-1.16; seven studies; I2=0). Neither adjuvanted (OR 1.06, 0.95-1.20; five studies; I2=18.8) nor unadjuvanted vaccines (OR 0.89, 0.75-1.04; seven studies; I2=22.6) were associated with an increased risk for congenital defects.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review did not indicate an increased risk for congenital anomalies after maternal influenza immunization adding to the evidence base on the safety of influenza vaccination in pregnancy.

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.

Perinatal survival and health after maternal influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination: A cohort study of pregnancies stratified by trimester of vaccination

Large cohort studies demonstrated the safety of vaccination with the AS03 adjuvanted pandemic influenza vaccine, but data on first trimester vaccination safety are limited. We conducted a nationwide register-based retrospective cohort study in Finland, included singleton pregnancies present on 01 November 2009 and followed them from 01 November 2009 until delivery. Pregnancies with abortive outcome, pregnancies that started before 01 February 2009 and pregnancies of women, who received the AS03 adjuvanted pandemic influenza vaccine prior to the onset of pregnancy, were excluded. Our main outcome measures were hazard ratios comparing the risk of stillbirth, early neonatal death, moderately preterm birth, very preterm birth, moderately low birth weight, very low birth weight, and being small for gestational age between pregnancies exposed and unexposed to maternal influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination. The study population comprised 43,604 pregnancies; 34,241 (78.5%) women were vaccinated at some stage during pregnancy. The rates of stillbirth, early neonatal death, moderately preterm birth, and moderately low birth weight were similar between pregnant women exposed and unexposed to influenza A(H1N1)pdm09 vaccination. After adjusting for known risk factors, the relative rates were 0.90 (95% confidence interval 0.55-1.45) for very preterm birth, 0.84 (0.61-1.16) for very low birth weight, and 1.17 (0.98-1.40) for being small for gestational age. Also, in the subanalysis of 7839 women vaccinated during the first trimester, the rates did not indicate that maternal vaccination during the first trimester had any adverse impact on perinatal survival and health. The risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes was not associated with the exposure to the AS03 adjuvanted pandemic influenza vaccine. This study adds reassuring evidence on the safety of AS03 adjuvanted influenza vaccines when given in the first trimester and supports the recommendation of influenza vaccination to all pregnant women through all stages of pregnancy.

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).

Adjuvanted vaccines in pregnancy: no evidence for effect of the adjuvanted H1N1/09 vaccination on occurrence of preeclampsia or intra-uterine growth restriction

OBJECTIVE

During the H1N1/09 pandemic, pregnant women in the Netherlands were vaccinated with an adjuvanted vaccine. During pregnancy, the maternal immune system changes to enable placental development and growth and acceptance of the semi-allogeneic fetus. As an adjuvant is a pro-inflammatory substance, it may interfere with these immunological changes, resulting in poor placentation or placental growth, which may result in preeclampsia (PE) and fetal intra-uterine growth restriction (IUGR). This study investigated a possible association between adjuvanted H1N1/09 vaccination and the development of PE and/or IUGR.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study. Cases were Dutch women with PE and/or IUGR occurring during H1N1/09 vaccination program. Controls had uncomplicated pregnancies during the same period. Maternal characteristics, pregnancy and neonatal outcomes were collected from medical files. Participants were contacted by telephone to enquire about vaccination. Data were analyzed using t-tests, Chi-square tests or Fisher's exact tests. Multivariate analysis was conducted to control for confounders.

RESULTS

We included 254 cases and 247 controls. Of the cases, 90 (35.4%) were vaccinated, compared to 87 (35.2%) of the controls (OR:1.009, 95% CI:0.70-1.46, p:0.961). The majority (73.5%) had been vaccinated in second and third trimester. In multivariate analysis, there were no confounders influencing these results. Exploratory subgroup analysis did not show an association between vaccination status in subgroups of women with either PE or IUGR.

CONCLUSION

Our study showed no association between adjuvanted H1N1/09 vaccination and PE and/or IUGR.

Maternal immune activation and abnormal brain development across CNS disorders

Epidemiological studies have shown a clear association between maternal infection and schizophrenia or autism in the progeny. Animal models have revealed maternal immune activation (mIA) to be a profound risk factor for neurochemical and behavioural abnormalities in the offspring. Microglial priming has been proposed as a major consequence of mIA, and represents a critical link in a causal chain that leads to the wide spectrum of neuronal dysfunctions and behavioural phenotypes observed in the juvenile, adult or aged offspring. Such diversity of phenotypic outcomes in the mIA model are mirrored by recent clinical evidence suggesting that infectious exposure during pregnancy is also associated with epilepsy and, to a lesser extent, cerebral palsy in children. Preclinical research also suggests that mIA might precipitate the development of Alzheimer and Parkinson diseases. Here, we summarize and critically review the emerging evidence that mIA is a shared environmental risk factor across CNS disorders that varies as a function of interactions between genetic and additional environmental factors. We also review ongoing clinical trials targeting immune pathways affected by mIA that may play a part in disease manifestation. In addition, future directions and outstanding questions are discussed, including potential symptomatic, disease-modifying and preventive treatment strategies.

Safety of inactivated monovalent pandemic (H1N1) 2009 vaccination during pregnancy: a population-based study in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Pregnant women were prioritized for H1N1 vaccination during the 2009-2010 pandemic. Safety concerns exist with vaccinating pregnant women, particularly in their first trimesters.

METHODS

We linked computerized data on H1N1 vaccination, National Health Insurance, and Taiwan Birth Registry and identified events of spontaneous abortions (SABs) and all singleton births that occurred/delivered during November 1, 2009-September 30, 2010. The observation period for each case of SAB (6-19 weeks gestation) was divided into period at risk (1-28 days after vaccination) and control periods (the remaining person-days until SAB). The self-controlled case series method for truncated observational periods assessed the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of SAB during the 1-28 days compared with those in the control period. The case-control design matched each case of adverse fetal outcomes to up to 10 controls on fetal sex and year/month of pregnancy onset, and calculated matched odds ratio (OR) on H1N1 vaccination at <14 or ≥14 weeks gestation.

RESULTS

Sixty-five women with SAB had received H1N1 vaccination at 6-19 weeks gestation. The IRR of SAB for the risk period 1-28 days was 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-1.93). Among the 147,294 live births and 1354 stillbirths, maternal H1N1 vaccine receipt at <14 weeks gestation was associated with significantly reduced likelihood of small for gestational age (SGA) birth (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.61-0.84) and birth defect (OR 0.46, 95% CI 0.22-1.00), whereas receipt at ≥14 weeks gestation was associated with significantly reduced likelihood of stillbirth (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.46-0.86), prematurity (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.83-0.97), low birth weight (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.74-0.88), and SGA birth (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

H1N1 vaccination during pregnancy did not increase risk of SAB or adverse fetal outcomes.