Profiling COVID-19 Vaccine Adverse Events by Statistical and Ontological Analysis of VAERS Case Reports

Sex and gender differences in adverse events following influenza and COVID-19 vaccination

INTRODUCTION

Active and passive surveillance studies have found that a greater proportion of females report adverse events (AE) following receipt of either the COVID-19 or seasonal influenza vaccine compared to males. In a predominately young adult female population of healthcare workers, we sought to determine the intersection of biological sex and sociocultural gender differences in prospective active reporting of vaccine outcomes, which remains poorly characterized.

METHODS

This cohort study enrolled Johns Hopkins Health System healthcare workers (HCWs) who were recruited from the mandatory annual fall 2019-2022 influenza vaccine and the fall 2022 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine campaigns. Vaccine recipients were enrolled the day of vaccination and AE surveys were administered two days post-vaccination for bivalent COVID-19 and influenza vaccine recipients. Data were collected regarding the presence of a series of solicited local and systemic AEs. Open-ended answers about participants' experiences with AEs also were collected for the COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

RESULTS

Females were more likely to report local AEs after either influenza (OR = 2.28, p = 0.001) or COVID-19 (OR = 2.57, p = 0.008) vaccination compared to males, regardless of age or race. Males and females had comparable probabilities of reporting systemic AEs after either influenza (OR = 1.18, p = 0.552) or COVID-19 (OR = 0.96, p = 0.907) vaccination. Hormonal birth control use did not impact the rates of reported AEs following influenza vaccination among reproductive-aged female HCWs. Women reported more interruptions in their daily routine following COVID-19 vaccination than men and were more likely to seek out self-treatment. More women than men scheduled their COVID-19 vaccination before their days off in anticipation of AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight the need for sex- and gender-inclusive policies to inform more effective mandatory occupational health vaccination strategies. Further research is needed to evaluate the potential disruption of AEs on occupational responsibilities following mandated vaccination for healthcare workers, a predominately female population, and to more fully characterize the post-vaccination behavioral differences between men and women.

Sex and gender differences in adverse events following receipt of influenza and COVID-19 vaccination among healthcare workers

Introduction

Active and passive surveillance studies have found that a greater proportion of females report adverse events (AE) following receipt of either the COVID-19 or seasonal influenza vaccine compared to males. We sought to determine the intersection of biological sex and sociocultural gender differences in prospective active reporting of vaccine outcomes, which remains poorly characterized.

Methods

This cohort study enrolled Johns Hopkins Health System healthcare workers (HCWs) who were recruited from the annual fall 2019-2022 influenza vaccine and the fall 2022 COVID-19 bivalent vaccine campaigns. Vaccine recipients were enrolled the day of vaccination and AE surveys were administered two days post-vaccination (DPV) for bivalent COVID-19 and Influenza vaccine recipients. Data were collected regarding the presence of a series of solicited local and systemic AEs. Open-ended answers about participants' experiences with AEs also were collected for the COVID-19 vaccine recipients.

Results

Females were more likely to report local AEs after influenza (OR=2.28, p=0.001) or COVID-19 (OR=2.57, p=0.008) vaccination compared to males, regardless of age or race. Males and females had comparable probabilities of reporting systemic AEs after influenza (OR=1.18, p=0.552) or COVID-19 (OR=0.96, p=0.907) vaccination. Exogenous hormones from birth control use did not impact the rates of reported AEs following COVID-19 vaccination among reproductive-aged female HCWs. Women reported more interruptions in their daily routine following COVID-19 vaccination than men and were more likely to seek out self-treatment. More women than men scheduled their COVID-19 vaccination before their days off in anticipation of AEs.

Conclusions

Our findings highlight the need for sex- and gender-inclusive policies to inform more effective occupational health vaccination strategies. Further research is needed to evaluate the potential disruption of AEs on occupational responsibilities following mandated vaccination for healthcare workers and to more fully characterize the post-vaccination behavioral differences between men and women.

KEY MESSAGE

What is already known on this topic: ⇒ Among diversely aged adults 18-64 years, females report more AEs to vaccines, including the influenza and COVID-19 vaccines, than males.⇒ Vaccine AEs play a role in shaping vaccine hesitancy and uptake.⇒ Vaccine uptake related to influenza and COVID-19 are higher among men than women.⇒ Research that addresses both the sex and gender disparities of vaccine outcomes and behaviors is lacking.What this study adds: ⇒ This prospective active reporting study uses both quantitative and qualitative survey data to examine sex and gender differences in AEs following influenza or COVID-19 vaccination among a cohort of reproductive-aged healthcare workers.How this study might affect research, practice, or policy: ⇒ Sex and gender differences in AEs and perceptions relating to vaccination should drive the development of more equitable and effective vaccine strategies and policies in occupational health settings.

Vaccine Safety: Assessing the Prevalence and Severity of Adverse Events Following COVID-19 Vaccination amongst Healthcare Workers in Tertiary Health Facilities in Nigeria

BACKGROUND

Vaccines, including COVID-19 vaccines, are known to be cost-effective interventions for disease prevention and control. However, adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) may challenge the acceptance of these vaccines. This study assessed the prevalence and severity of COVID-19-related AEFI amongst healthcare workers at tertiary health facilities in Nigeria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This descriptive, cross-sectional study was conducted among healthcare workers who had received the COVID-19 vaccine. A multi-stage sampling technique was used to select participants from six Tertiary Health Facilities in Nigeria. Ethical approval (NHREC/01/01/2007-19/07/2021) was obtained from NHREC. Data were analysed using IBM® SPSS version 25 and categorical variables were presented in tables/charts using frequencies and proportions.

RESULTS

A total of 2130 respondents participated in the study, with a mean age of 37.4 ± 9.1 years. Most of the respondents, 1674 (78.6%), had two doses of the vaccine, and the overall prevalence of AEFI was 813 (38.2%). Common among the AEFI reported following the administration of the first dose of the vaccine were fever 649 (30.5%) and pain at the injection site 644 (30.2%), while it was pain at the injection site 216 (10.1%) and fever 173 (8.1%) for second dose. The higher proportions of AEFI were mostly mild to moderate.

CONCLUSION

The study observed a relatively low prevalence of AEFI, with the commonly reported ones being fever and injection site pain. It is crucial that countries continuously collect the data on AEFI and establish causality as a way to improve quality and guarantee vaccine safety.

Hearing Loss after COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Vaccination: A Systematic Review

(1) Background: Vaccine safety is an important topic with public health implications on a global scale. The purpose of this study was to systematically review available literature assessing sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) incidence and severity following both coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and non-COVID-19 vaccinations, as well as prognosis and outcomes. (2) Methods: This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Relevant publications evaluating post-vaccination SNHL were selected from PubMed and Embase, searching from inception to July 2023. (3) Results: From 11 observational studies, the incidence of post-vaccination SNHL was low for both COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 vaccines, ranging from 0.6 to 60.77 per 100,000 person-years, comparable to all-cause SNHL. (4) Conclusions: The incidence rates of SNHL following COVID-19 and non-COVID-19 vaccinations remained reassuringly low. Most patients experienced improved hearing function in the weeks to months following vaccination. This study underscores the importance and safety of vaccinations and encourages ongoing surveillance and detailed reporting of hearing loss cases post-vaccination.

Optic Neuritis After COVID-19 Vaccination: An Analysis of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System

BACKGROUND

To investigate the association of optic neuritis (ON) after the COVID-19 vaccines.

METHODS

Cases of ON from Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) were collected and divided into the prepandemic, COVID-19 pandemic, and COVID-19 vaccine periods. Reporting rates were calculated based on estimates of vaccines administered. Proportion tests and Pearson χ 2 test were used to determine significant differences in reporting rates of ON after vaccines within the 3 periods. Kruskal-Wallis testing with Bonferroni-corrected post hoc analysis and multivariable binary logistic regression was used to determine significant case factors such as age, sex, concurrent multiple sclerosis (MS) and vaccine manufacturer in predicting a worse outcome defined as permanent disability, emergency room (ER) or doctor visits, and hospitalizations.

RESULTS

A significant increase in the reporting rate of ON after COVID-19 vaccination compared with influenza vaccination and all other vaccinations (18.6 vs 0.2 vs 0.4 per 10 million, P < 0.0001) was observed. However, the reporting rate was within the incidence range of ON in the general population. Using self-controlled and case-centered analyses, there was a significant difference in the reporting rate of ON after COVID-19 vaccination between the risk period and control period ( P < 0.0001). Multivariable binary regression with adjustment for confounding variables demonstrated that only male sex was significantly associated with permanent disability.

CONCLUSIONS

Some cases of ON may be temporally associated with the COVID-19 vaccines; however, there is no significant increase in the reporting rate compared with the incidence. Limitations of this study include those inherent to any passive surveillance system. Controlled studies are needed to establish a clear causal relationship.

Hemostatic Profile and Serological Response of Patients with Immune Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura after Receiving BNT162b2 Vaccine: A Prospective Study

INTRODUCTION

 Coronavirus disease is a clinical challenge for patients with autoimmune conditions. Patients affected by immune thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (iTTP) are particularly vulnerable to SARS-CoV-2 infection. Protecting these patients with vaccination is therefore mandatory, although concerns may exist on a possible increased thrombotic risk or risk of disease relapse after vaccine exposure. So far, there is no information on serological response and hemostatic activation in iTTP patients after SARS-CoV-2 vaccination.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

 In this study, in April 2021, we enrolled iTTP patients in clinical remission and on regular outpatient follow-up to receive the first and second dose BNT162b2 vaccine as a part of a prospective trial aimed at monitoring for 6 months after vaccination the occurrence of subclinical laboratory signs of clotting activation, as well as overt thrombotic complications or disease relapse. The seroconversion response was monitored in parallel. The results were compared with those of control non-iTTP subjects.

RESULTS

 A moderate decrease of ADAMTS-13 activity was recorded at 3 and 6 months in five patients with normal values at baseline, while an ADAMTS-13 relapse occurred at 6 months in one patient. Abnormalities in the endothelium activation biomarkers postvaccination were observed in iTTP patients compared with controls. The immunological response to vaccine was overall positive. No clinical iTTP relapses or thrombotic events manifested in the 6 month-follow-up after vaccination.

CONCLUSION

 The results of this study are in favor of efficacy and safety of mRNA vaccines in patients with iTTP, and highlight the importance of long-term monitoring of iTTP patients.

Effects of COVID-19 and Influenza Vaccination on Rheumatic Diseases: Results From a Survey of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Vaccination

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to compare the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and disease flares after vaccination against coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) and influenza in patients with autoimmune rheumatic diseases (ARDs).

METHODS

Between November 2021 and March 2022, a survey was conducted among patients with ARD who received COVID-19 and influenza vaccinations. The questionnaire included 11 mandatory and closed-ended questions, and the following items were collected: medical history, immunization history, type of vaccine, patient-reported AEs, flare-up of the underlying disease after vaccination, and a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 or influenza. We compared the occurrence of vaccine-related adverse reactions to the COVID-19 and influenza vaccines based on the survey results. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify the factors affecting AEs or disease flares and to compare the post-vaccine response to mixed and matched vaccines.

RESULTS

We analyzed 601 adults with ARD who received the COVID-19 vaccine, with a mean age of 49.6 years (80.5% female). A total of 255 participants (42.4%) received a complete course of primary vaccination, 342 (56.9%) completed the booster dose, and 132 (38.6%) received a mixed vaccine. The frequencies of AEs (188 [52.2%] vs. 21 [5.8%]; P < 0.001) and disease flares (58 [16.2%] vs. 5 [1.4%]; P < 0.001) after COVID-19 vaccination were significantly higher than those after influenza vaccination. In the risk factor analysis, previous allergic reaction to other vaccines (odds ratio, 1.95; confidence interval, 1.07-3.70; P = 0.034) was the only factor associated with the occurrence of AEs. There was no difference in the post-vaccine responses between the mixed and matched vaccines.

CONCLUSION

The results of the survey of patients with ARD revealed that patient-reported AEs and underlying disease flares after receiving the COVID-19 vaccine were significantly higher than those after the influenza vaccine.

Effects of Different Types of COVID-19 Vaccines on Menstrual Cycles of Females of Reproductive Age Group (15-49): A Multinational Cross-Sectional Study

Background Globally, there are more than 474 million cases and around 6 million deaths due to COVID-19. The case fatality rate was 0.5-2.8% while for 80-89 years old, it was 3.7-14.8%. Given the seriousness of this infection, prevention becomes critical. Hence, the introduction of vaccines led to a significant reduction (> 75% protection) in COVID-19 cases. On the other hand, patients seeking help for serious pulmonary, cardiovascular, neurological, and gynecological complaints have also been recorded. Clinical studies on the effects of vaccination focused mostly on life-or-death results rather than reproductive outcomes such as menstruation, fertility, or even pregnancy outcomes. This survey was conducted to get more evidence on the association between menstrual cycle irregularities and some globally most prevalent COVID-19 vaccines. Methods An online cross-sectional survey was conducted by a team from Taif University, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, from January to June 2022 on females within the reproductive age group (15-49 years) using a semi-structured questionnaire. Data were analyzed using SPSS Statistics version 22.0 and presented as frequency and percentage. The chi-square test was applied for the association and a p-value of <0.05 was considered significant. Results A total of 2381 responses were included. The mean age of respondents was 25±7.7 years. Around 1604 (67%) participants observed post-vaccination menstrual changes, and the findings were significant (p< 0.001). A strong association (p=.008) was found between the type of vaccine and changes in the menstrual cycle in participants (AstraZeneca 11 (36%)) after one dose. A strong association (p=.004) was also seen between the type of vaccine (Pfizer 543 (83%)) and menstrual changes after the booster dose. Cycles became irregular 180 (36%) or prolonged 144 (29%) in females inoculated with Pfizer after two doses of vaccination (p=0.012). Conclusion Post-vaccination menstrual irregularities were reported by females of reproductive age, especially the new vaccines. Prospective studies for similar insights are needed. Finding the co-occurring impacts of vaccination and COVID-19 infections in the wake of the emerging new long-haul COVID-19 phenomena is crucial for reproductive health.

B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma following intravenous BNT162b2 mRNA booster in a BALB/c mouse: A case report

Unprecedented immunization campaigns have been rolled out worldwide in an attempt to contain the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Multiple vaccines were brought to the market, among two utilizing novel messenger ribonucleic acid technology. Despite their undisputed success in decreasing COVID-19-associated hospitalizations and mortality, various adverse events have been reported. The emergence of malignant lymphoma is one of such rare adverse events that has raised concern, although an understanding of the mechanisms potentially involved remains lacking. Herein, we present the first case of B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma following intravenous high-dose mRNA COVID-19 vaccination (BNT162b2) in a BALB/c mouse. Two days following booster vaccination (i.e., 16 days after prime), at only 14 weeks of age, our animal suffered spontaneous death with marked organomegaly and diffuse malignant infiltration of multiple extranodal organs (heart, lung, liver, kidney, spleen) by lymphoid neoplasm. Immunohistochemical examination revealed organ sections positive for CD19, terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase, and c-MYC, compatible with a B-cell lymphoblastic lymphoma immunophenotype. Our murine case adds to previous clinical reports on malignant lymphoma development following novel mRNA COVID-19 vaccination, although a demonstration of direct causality remains difficult. Extra vigilance is required, with conscientious reporting of similar cases and a further investigation of the mechanisms of action explaining the aforementioned association.

COVID-19 Vaccines: An Updated Overview of Different Platforms

Vaccination has been identified as a critical method of disease control in the context of the current COVID-19 pandemic. The goal of this review is to update information on vaccine development and to identify areas of concern that require further research. We reviewed the literature on the development of COVID-19 vaccines, their efficacy, and use in special populations, as well as current vaccination strategies. To date, 170 vaccines are in clinical development, with 41 being already approved for use in various countries. The majority of vaccines approved for human use are vector-, subunit-, DNA-, or mRNA-based vaccines, or inactivated viruses. Because of the ongoing mutation of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, well-studied vector vaccines are losing relevance due to the ability of new virus strains to bypass neutralizing antibodies. Simultaneously, PS-based vaccines are becoming more popular. There is mounting evidence that the immunogenicity of COVID-19 vaccines is linked to their clinical efficacy. This has resulted in a shift in vaccination strategies, as well as the use of booster doses and revaccination. Furthermore, vaccination restrictions for children, pregnant women, the elderly, and people with chronic immunosuppressive diseases have been lifted, allowing more people to be vaccinated. New data on vaccine safety, including the incidence of serious adverse events, have been collected. Despite significant advances in the development of and research on COVID-19 vaccines, many questions remain that require further investigation.

Shot in the Dark

A 43-year-old woman presented with decreased vision in the right eye associated with painful eye movements 10 days after receiving her first dose of Pfizer-BioNTech coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine (Pfizer Inc, New York, NY). Two days later she developed painful loss of vision in the left eye. Clinical presentation and magnetic resonance imaging findings were consistent with bilateral optic perineuritis transitioning to optic neuritis. Extensive evaluation including aquaporin-4 immunoglobin G (IgG), myelin oligodendrocyte glycoprotein IgG, and lumbar puncture was unrevealing. Visual acuity at nadir was counting fingers in both eyes, but after receiving intravenous steroids and plasma exchange vision eventually improved to 20/20 in each eye, although she was left with inferior visual field defects and bilateral optic disc pallor. This case highlights the diagnostic challenge in the evaluation of atypical optic neuritis with a review of post-COVID-19 vaccination-associated optic neuritis.