No association between influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes

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

Introduction

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Pregnant women's attitudes and behaviours towards antenatal vaccination against Influenza and COVID-19 in the Liverpool City Region, United Kingdom: Cross-sectional survey

Objectives

Influenza poses a serious health risk to pregnant women and their babies. Despite this risk, influenza vaccine uptake in pregnant women in the UK is less than 50%. Little is known about how COVID-19 affects pregnant women, but its management may affect attitudes and behaviours towards vaccination in pregnancy. The study objectives were to establish attitudes and knowledge of pregnant women towards influenza disease and influenza vaccination and to compare these to attitudes and knowledge about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccination.

Design

A cross-sectional survey was conducted using an online questionnaire distributed through local advertisement and social media outlets. Information was sought on attitudes and knowledge of influenza and COVID-19 and their respective vaccines.

Participants and setting

Pregnant women residing in Liverpool City Region, UK.

Results

Of the 237 respondents, 73.8% reported receiving an influenza vaccine. Over half (56.5%) perceived themselves to be at risk from influenza, 70.5% believed that if they got influenza, their baby would get ill, and 64.6% believed getting influenza could hurt their baby, 60.3% believed that the influenza vaccine would prevent their baby from getting ill, and 70.8% believed it would protect their baby. Only 32.9% of respondents stated they would receive the COVID-19 vaccine if it were available to them. However, 80.2% stated they would receive a COVID-19 vaccine if they were not pregnant. Most of the women stated that they would accept a vaccine if recommended to them by healthcare professionals.

Conclusions

Acceptance of the influenza and COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy seems to be more related to the safety of the baby rather than the mother. Women perceived their child to be more at risk than themselves. Information about influenza and COVID-19 vaccine safety as well as healthcare provider recommendations play an important role in vaccine uptake in pregnant women.

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.

Immunization during pregnancy: do healthcare workers recommend vaccination against influenza?

Background

A variety of circumstances can influence how widely vaccination during pregnancy is accepted. Healthcare workers (HCWs) are often seen as the main resource for recommending vaccination. The purpose of the current study was to determine whether Italian HCWs advise and recommend pregnant people to receive the influenza vaccinations, as well as what knowledge and attitudes affect their practices. A secondary aim of the study was to evaluate HCWs' knowledge and attitudes towards COVID-19 vaccination.

Methods

This cross-sectional study, took place between August 2021 and June 2022 in a randomly selected sample of HCWs in three Italian regions. The target population comprised obstetricians-gynecologists, midwives and primary care physicians, who provide medical care to pregnant people. The questionnaire consisted of 19 items divided into 5 parts gathered information about the participants' sociodemographic and professional characteristics, general knowledge about vaccinations during pregnancy, and vaccine-preventable diseases (VPDs), attitudes and practices towards immunization, and strategies to potentially increase vaccination uptake during pregnancy.

Results

Among the participants, 78.3% knew that pregnant people are at increased risk of severe complications from influenza, 57.8% that the influenza vaccine is not provided only in the 2nd/3rd trimester of pregnancy and 60% that pregnancy is a risk factor for severe COVID-19 infection. Of the enrolled HCWs, 10.8% believed that the potential risks of vaccines administered during pregnancy are greater than the benefits. An even higher proportion of the participants was unsure (24.3%) or did not deem (15.9%) that vaccinating against influenza during pregnancy reduces the risk of preterm birth and abortion. Moreover, 11.8% of the sample did not believe or was uncertain that COVID-19 vaccine must be offered to all pregnant people. Among HCWs, 71.8% advised women about influenza vaccination during pregnancy, and 68.8% recommended getting vaccinated against influenza during pregnancy. Results showed that good knowledge and positive attitudes were the strongest factors positively associated with advising women about influenza vaccination during pregnancy.

Conclusion

The gathered data showed that a sizable portion of the HCWs lacks up-to-date knowledge, underestimates the risks of contracting a VPD, and overestimates the risks of vaccine side effects during pregnancy. The findings shed light on such attributes useful to promote adherence to evidence-based recommendations among HCWs.

The association between maternal influenza vaccination during pregnancy and adverse birth outcomes in the United States: Pregnancy risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS)

OBJECTIVE

Influenza vaccination during pregnancy is highly recommended. We examined the association between maternal influenza vaccination and adverse birth outcomes.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study used data from the Pregnancy Risk Assessment Monitoring System (PRAMS) during 2012-2017. The primary exposure was the receipt of influenza vaccination during pregnancy. Low birth weight (LBW), preterm birth (PTB), and small for gestational age (SGA) were the primary outcomes. We conducted multivariable logistic regression models to estimate the adjusted odds ratios (AOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Covariates used to adjust confounding included maternal age, marital status, education, race and ethnicity, insurance status before pregnancy, and smoking status. For a subgroup in 2012-2015, we analyzed the association between influenza vaccination in each trimester and adverse birth outcomes.

RESULTS

During 2012-2017, compared with unvaccinated women, women vaccinated during pregnancy had a lower risk of LBW and PTB. During 2012-2015, maternal influenza vaccination in the 1st and 3rd trimesters was associated with a reduced risk of LBW and PTB, and vaccination in the 3rd trimester had a greater protective effect than in the 1st trimester. Influenza vaccination was not associated with SGA regardless of trimester.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that influenza vaccination during pregnancy is a safe and effective way to protect newborns.

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

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

Outcomes in Pregnant Persons Immunized with a Cell-Based Quadrivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study

Objective: To evaluate pregnancy and infant outcomes among persons immunized with a cell-based quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4c) during routine pregnancy care. Design: Prospective observational cohort. Setting: US-based obstetrics/gynecology clinics. Population: Pregnant persons. This US-based, prospective observational cohort study evaluated the safety of quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4c; Flucelvax® Quad) in pregnant persons immunized over 3 influenza seasons between 2017 and 2020. Pregnant persons were immunized with IIV4c as part of routine care, after which their health care provides HCPs with all observational data to a single coordinating center. Follow-up data were collected at the end of the second trimester and/or at the time of pregnancy outcome. A scientific advisory committee reviewed the data. Prevalence point estimates were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Pregnancy outcomes included: live birth, stillbirth, spontaneous abortion, elective termination, and maternal death. Infant outcomes included: preterm birth (<37 weeks gestational age), low birth weight (<2500 g), or major congenital malformations (MCMs). Of the 665 evaluable participants, 659 (99.1%) had a live birth. No stillbirths (0% [95% CI 0.0−0.6]), 4 spontaneous abortions (1.9% [0.5−4.8]), and 1 elective termination (0.5% [0.0−2.6]) were reported. Among 673 infants, 9.2% (upper 95% CI 11.5%) were born prematurely, 5.8% (upper 95% CI 7.6%) had low birth weight, and 1.9% (upper 95% CI 3.1%) were reported to have an MCM. No maternal deaths were reported. Of the 2 infants who died shortly after birth, one was adjudicated as not related to the vaccine; the other’s cause could not be determined due to maternal loss to follow-up. The prevalence of adverse pregnancy outcomes or preterm birth, low birth weight, or MCMs in newborns was similar in persons vaccinated with IIV4c compared to the rates observed in US surveillance systems. The safety profile of IIV4c in pregnant persons is consistent with previously studied influenza vaccines.

A Prospective Cohort Study on Pregnancy Outcomes of Persons Immunized with a Seasonal Quadrivalent Inactivated Influenza Vaccine during Pregnancy

This US-based, prospective observational cohort study evaluated the safety of a quadrivalent inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV4; Afluria Quadrivalent) in pregnant persons immunized over four influenza seasons between 2017 and 2021. Pregnancy outcomes included live birth, stillbirth, spontaneous abortion, and elective termination. Infant events of interest were major congenital malformations (MCMs), preterm birth (<37 weeks gestational age), and low birth weight (LBW). Data were descriptive; prevalence point estimates were reported with 95% confidence intervals (CI). A total of 483 pregnant persons were given IIV4 and evaluated; 477 (98.8%) reported a live birth, and there were 2 stillbirths, 4 spontaneous abortions, and no elective terminations or maternal deaths. The prevalence rates of infant events were as follows: preterm birth, 7.2% (upper 95% CI, 9.6%); LBW, 5.4% (upper 95% CI, 7.4%); and MCMs, 0.8% (upper 95% CI, 1.9%). Point estimates and upper 95% CIs of the observed prevalence rates were lower than or similar to background prevalence in the general US population. Our findings suggest no evidence of a safety concern with vaccinating this group at high risk of influenza complications and are consistent with published data from databases and surveillance systems that monitor the safety of influenza vaccines in pregnant persons.

Hospitalization of Children Aged <5 Years Due to Influenza: Study Based on the National Hospitalization Registry

Background: Influenza constitutes a significant health care burden that can be related to an increased morbidity and mortality. The aim of the study is to show up-to-date information on influenza hospitalization cases in Poland in children aged <5 years. Methods: The data used in the study were hospitalization records from 2015−2019, which had been gathered in a Nationwide General Hospital Morbidity Study and made available by the National Institute of Public Health. Results: 8565 records of patients with influenza were subject to analysis. The mean and median age of the patients were 2.2 and 2.1 years, respectively. Influenza hospitalization incidence was estimated at 90 per 100,000 person-years (PY) in children aged <5 years. The number of hospitalization cases was significantly higher in patients living in urban regions than in those living in rural regions (97 vs. 77 per 100,000 PY; p < 0.001). The age of patients living in urban regions was significantly lower than the age of patients living in rural regions (2.2 vs. 2.3 years; p < 0.001). A statistically significant increase in hospitalization was observed. Conclusions: The reported increasing trend in hospitalizations indicates the need to take focused measures. Presented data may be useful in comparative analyses in a European context.

Exposure to quadrivalent influenza vaccine during pregnancy: Results from a global pregnancy registry

BACKGROUND

The Fluzone® Quadrivalent (IIV4, Sanofi Pasteur) Pregnancy Registry was created to monitor vaccine safety during pregnancy (clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01945424). Here, we describe maternal, pregnancy, obstetrical and neonatal outcomes after vaccine exposure in pregnant women between August 2013 and September 2019.

METHODS

All women exposed to IIV4 during their pregnancy were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes were prospective (reported following vaccine exposure but before knowledge of pregnancy outcome ascertained through prenatal tests) or retrospective (prenatal tests were undertaken before the exposure was reported).

RESULTS

Among 239 IIV4 vaccine exposure reports received, there were 105 prospective and 10 retrospective reports of maternal adverse events (AEs). The most frequent prospectively reported maternal AEs were medication errors (expired product [n = 8, 3.8%]; extra dose [n = 7, 3.3%]) and injection site pain (n = 7, 3.3%). Among 62 prospectively reported pregnancy and obstetrical events with available follow-up information, seven AEs were reported, four (6.4%) of which were spontaneous abortions. A further seven AEs were reported among the 29 retrospective pregnancy and obstetrical events with available follow-up information. Among neonatal outcomes (15 prospective; 28 retrospective), >85% were reported as full-term births. One premature birth was reported prospectively. Four other neonatal AEs were reported, all retrospectively: two cases of talipes (club foot), one central nervous system anomaly and one atrial septal defect. All infants with available information had normal APGAR scores at 5 minutes.

CONCLUSIONS

The frequency of AEs following exposure to IIV4 during pregnancy did not indicate new safety concerns.

Health education intervention to improve vaccination knowledge and attitudes in a cohort of obstetrics students

Introduction

To improve the vaccination coverage in pregnant women it is important to increase their knowledge of vaccines and related preventable diseases. Midwifes can play an important role because they are often the first contact for woman during her pregnancy. This study aimed to explore the vaccination knowledge and attitudes in a cohort of Obstetrics students in Italy and improve their knowledge through an informative health education intervention.

Methods

The study consisted in the administration of a first questionnaire followed by a health education intervention concerning all aspects of vaccinations. Then, a second questionnaire to evaluate the efficacy of the educational program was administered.

Results

From the pre-intervention questionnaire resulted that almost the whole sample (97.1%) were favorable to vaccines in general. Moreover, 65.7% of the participants declared a sufficient level of vaccination knowledge but 62.9% found herself unprepared to answer questions and provide information about vaccinations. Concerning the answers about vaccination in pregnancy, the correct answers went from 17.1 to 68.6% respectively before and after educational intervention. The training intervention obtained a total consensus (100%). The most part of the students (85.7%) declared that the received information changed some of their beliefs and the entire sample (100%) stated that it improved their preparation.

Conclusions

Our results revealed some critical issues in the preparation of midwifes about vaccinations and confirm the necessity to carry out health intervention campaigns to these health professionals that, for the role they play, they must necessarily be well prepared.

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

Background

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusion

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

Guidance for design and analysis of observational studies of fetal and newborn outcomes following COVID-19 vaccination during pregnancy

COVID-19 vaccines are now being deployed as essential tools in the public health response to the global SARS-CoV-2 pandemic. Pregnant individuals are a unique subgroup of the population with distinctive considerations regarding risk and benefit that extend beyond themselves to their fetus/newborn. As a complement to traditional pharmacovigilance and clinical studies, evidence to comprehensively assess COVID-19 vaccine safety in pregnancy will need to be generated through observational epidemiologic studies in large populations. However, there are several unique methodological challenges that face observational assessments of vaccination during pregnancy, some of which may be more pronounced for COVID-19 studies. In this contribution, we discuss the most critical study design, data collection, and analytical issues likely to arise. We offer brief guidance to optimize the quality of such studies to ensure their maximum value for informing public health decision-making.

Vaccination Status of Mothers and Children from the 'Mamma & Bambino' Cohort

According to the evidence demonstrating vaccines’ safety and effectiveness in anticipation of and during pregnancy, several countries have established immunization programs during the periconceptional period. Here, we evaluated vaccination status among 220 mother–child pairs, using data from the ‘Mamma & Bambino’ cohort. The self-reported data were evaluated at delivery, and with planned follow-ups at 1–2 years after delivery. In general, we noted that the vaccination status among the women was heterogeneous, ranging from 8.3% (vaccine against Human Papillomavirus, HPV) to 65.6% (vaccine against Diphtheria Tetanus and Pertussis, DTaP). Excluding the women who contracted the diseases in the past, the main ground for refusal was the lack of information. We also demonstrated that increasing age was associated with higher odds of not being vaccinated against Measles-Mumps-Rubella (MMR; OR = 1.12; 95% CI = 1.04–1.21; p = 0.004), HPV (OR = 1.20; 95% CI = 1.08–1.33; p = 0.001) and DTaP (OR =1.09; 95% CI = 1.01–1.18; p = 0.040). As expected, we showed that the proportion of newborns vaccinated with the Hexavalent and Pneumococcal vaccines was high (99.5% and 98.6%, respectively), while the vaccination coverage against MMRV did not reach the auspicated threshold (84.1%). Overall, these results underlined the need for the improvement of women’s knowledge about the recommendations for vaccination, especially during pregnancy.

A Retrospective observational cohort study of the effect of antenatal influenza vaccination on birth outcomes in Cape Town, South Africa, 2015-2016

Background

There are conflicting data concerning the impact of antenatal influenza vaccination on birth outcomes including low birthweight (LBW), preterm birth, small for gestational age (SGA), and stillbirth.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective observational cohort study of infants born to women residing in Mitchells Plain, Cape Town. Infants were born at 4 health facilities during May 28 – December 31, 2015 and April 15 – December 31, 2016. We performed crude and multivariable logistic regression, propensity score (PS) matching logistic regression, and inverse probability of treatment weighted (IPTW) regression to assess vaccine effectiveness (VE) against LBW, preterm birth, SGA, and stillbirth adjusting for measured confounders.

Results

Maternal vaccination status, antenatal history, and ≥1 birth outcome(s) were available for 4084/5333 (76.6%) pregnancies, 2109 (51.6%) vaccinated, and 1975 (48.4%) unvaccinated. The proportion LBW was lower in vaccinated (6.9%) vs. unvaccinated (12.5%) in multivariable [VE 0.27 (95% CI 0.07‐0.42)], PS [VE 0.30 (95% CI 0.09‐0.51)], and IPTW [VE 0.24 (95% CI 0.04‐0.45)]. Preterm birth was less frequent in vaccinated (8.6%) than unvaccinated (16.4%) in multivariable [VE 0.26 (0.09‐0.40)], PS [VE 0.25 (95% CI 0.09‐0.41)], and IPTW [VE 0.34 (95% CI 0.18‐0.51)]. The proportion SGA was lower in vaccinated (6.0%) than unvaccinated (8.8%) but not in adjusted models. There were few stillbirths in our study population, 30/4084 (0.7%).

Conclusions

Using multiple analytic approaches, we found that influenza vaccination was associated with lower prevalence of LBW (24‐30%) and preterm birth (25‐34%) in Cape Town during 2015‐2016.

Influenza in High-Risk Hosts-Lessons Learned from Animal Models

Factoring significantly into the global burden of influenza disease are high-risk populations that suffer the bulk of infections. Classically, the very young, very old, and pregnant women have been identified as high-risk populations; however, recent research has uncovered several other conditions that contribute to severe infection. By using varied animal models, researchers have identified molecular mechanisms underpinning the increased likelihood for infection due to obesity and malnourishment, as well as insight into the role sex hormones play in antiviral immunity in males, in females, and across the life span. Additionally, novel comorbidity models have helped elucidate the role of chronic infectious and genetic diseases in influenza virus pathogenesis. Animal models play a vital role in understanding the contribution of host factors to influenza severity and immunity. An in-depth understanding of these host factors represents an important step in reducing the burden of influenza among the growing number of people living with one or more chronic medical conditions.

Individual and Neighborhood Factors Associated With Failure to Vaccinate Against Influenza During Pregnancy

Uptake of influenza vaccine among pregnant women remains low. We investigated whether unvaccinated pregnant women were clustered geographically and determined factors associated with failure to vaccinate using spatial and multivariate logistic regression analyses. Pregnant women who were members of Kaiser Permanente Northern California in 2015 or 2016 were included in the study. More than half (53%) of the 77,607 included pregnant women were unvaccinated. Spatial analysis identified 5 clusters with a high prevalence of unvaccinated pregnant women. The proportion of unvaccinated women ranged from 57% to 75% within clusters as compared with 51% outside clusters. In covariate-adjusted analyses, residence in a cluster was associated with a 41% increase in the odds of being unvaccinated (odds ratio (OR) = 1.41, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.36, 1.46). The odds of being unvaccinated were greater for Black women (OR = 1.58, 95% CI: 1.49, 1.69), Hispanic women (OR = 1.15, 95% CI: 1.05, 1.25), women with subsidized health insurance (OR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.11, 1.24), women with fewer than 5 prenatal-care visits (OR = 1.85, 95% CI: 1.60, 2.16), and neighborhoods with a high deprivation index (fourth quartile vs. first: OR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.07, 1.21). In conclusion, unvaccinated pregnant women were clustered geographically and by key sociodemographic factors. These findings suggest that interventions to increase influenza vaccine coverage among pregnant women are needed, particularly in vulnerable populations.

Safety and protective effects of maternal influenza vaccination on pregnancy and birth outcomes: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Our study aimed to assess the safety and protective effect of maternal influenza vaccination on pregnancy and birth outcomes.

METHODS

The study population comprised 1253 healthy nulliparous pregnant women in South Australia between 2015 and 2018. Participants were followed prospectively, with vaccination status (confirmed by medical records), pregnancy, and birth outcome data collected by midwives. Adjusted relative risks (aRRs) and adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) were estimated accounting for time-varying vaccine exposure and temporal nature of each outcome.

FINDINGS

Maternal influenza vaccination (48%, 603 of 1253) reduced the risk for pre-delivery hospitalisation with influenza like illness (aHR 0•61; 95% CI 0•39, 0•97). Maternal influenza vaccination was not associated with spontaneous abortion (aHR 0•42, 95% CI 0•12, 1•45), chorioamnionitis (aRR 0•78, 95% CI, 0•32, 1•88), gestational hypertension (aHR 0•78, 95% CI 0•47, 1•29), pre-eclampsia (aHR 0.84, 95% CI 0•54, 1•27), gestational diabetes (aHR 1•16, 95% CI 0•82, 1•66) nor preterm birth (aHR 0•94, 95% CI 0•59, 1•49). No associations between antenatal influenza vaccination and congenital anomalies, admission to the neonatal care unit, low Apgar scores, and mechanical ventilation were observed. Results were not materially changed after adjustment for pertussis vaccination. We observed a protective effect of maternal influenza vaccination on low birth weight (aHR 0•46, 95% CI 0•23, 0•94) and a marginal protective effect on small for gestational age births (aHR 0•65, 95% CI 0•40, 1•04) during periods of high influenza activity.

INTERPRETATION

These results support the safety of maternal influenza vaccination and suggest a protective effect in reducing the rates of low birthweight and small for gestational age births.

FUNDING

There was no funding for this study.

Vaccine Safety: Myths and Misinformation

The World Health Organization has named vaccine hesitancy as one of the top ten threats to global health in 2019. The reasons why people choose not to vaccinate are complex, but lack of confidence in vaccine safety, driven by concerns about adverse events, has been identified as one of the key factors. Healthcare workers, especially those in primary care, remain key influencers on vaccine decisions. It is important, therefore, that they be supported by having easy access to trusted, evidence-based information on vaccines. Although parents and patients have a number of concerns about vaccine safety, among the most common are fears that adjuvants like aluminum, preservatives like mercury, inactivating agents like formaldehyde, manufacturing residuals like human or animal DNA fragments, and simply the sheer number of vaccines might be overwhelming, weakening or perturbing the immune system. As a consequence, some fear that vaccines are causing autism, diabetes, developmental delays, hyperactivity, and attention-deficit disorders, amongst others. In this review we will address several of these topics and highlight the robust body of scientific evidence that refutes common concerns about vaccine safety.

Are all vaccines safe for the pregnant traveller? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Pregnant travellers and their offspring are vulnerable to severe outcomes following a wide range of infections. Vaccine-preventable diseases can have a particularly severe course in pregnant women, but little is known about the safety of travel vaccines in pregnant women. We performed a systematic review of all published literature concerning the safety of vaccines frequently given to travellers such as yellow fever, MMR (mumps, measles and rubella), influenza, Tdap (tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis), meningococcus, hepatitis A and B, rabies, polio, typhoid fever, tick-borne encephalitis and Japanese encephalitis vaccines. We included case series, cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs). For the meta-analysis, we included only RCTs that compared the administration of a vaccine to placebo or to no vaccine. Outcome measures included severe systemic adverse events, maternal outcomes related to the course of pregnancy, neonatal outcomes and local adverse events. We calculated the risk ratio and its 95% confidence interval as the summary measure. The safety of influenza vaccine is supported by high-quality evidence. For Tdap vaccine, no evidence of any harm was found in the meta-analysis of RCTs. A slight increase in chorioamnionitis rate was reported in 3 out of 12 observational studies. However, this small possible risk is far outweighed by a much larger benefit in terms of infant morbidity and mortality. Meningococcal vaccines are probably safe during pregnancy, as supported by RCTs comparing meningococcal vaccines to other vaccines. Data from observational studies support the safety of hepatitis A, hepatitis B and rabies vaccines, as well as that of the live attenuated yellow fever vaccine. We found little or no data about the safety of polio, typhoid, Japanese encephalitis, tick-borne encephalitis and MMR vaccines during pregnancy.

The Importance of Vaccinating Children and Pregnant Women against Influenza Virus Infection

Influenza virus infection is responsible for significant morbidity and mortality in the pediatric and pregnant women populations, with deaths frequently caused by severe influenza-associated lower respiratory tract infection and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). An appropriate immune response requires controlling the viral infection through activation of antiviral defenses, which involves cells of the lung and immune system. High levels of viral infection or high levels of inflammation in the lower airways can contribute to ARDS. Pregnant women and young children, especially those born prematurely, may develop serious complications if infected with influenza virus. Vaccination against influenza will lead to lower infection rates and fewer complications, even if the vaccine is poorly matched to circulating viral strains, with maternal vaccination offering infants protection via antibody transmission through the placenta and breast milk. Despite the health benefits of the influenza vaccine, vaccination rates around the world remain well below targets. Trust in the use of vaccines among the public must be restored in order to increase vaccination rates and decrease the public health burden of influenza.

Gaps in maternal influenza vaccine uptake in Northern Territory: A need for a year-round influenza vaccination campaign

INTRODUCTION

Maternal influenza vaccination was introduced in 2010 due to the high morbidity and mortality associated with influenza in pregnancy. The aim of this study was to assess the maternal influenza vaccination uptake in Northern Territory public hospitals and identify gaps to improve uptake.

METHODS

Birth data from Northern Territory (NT) public hospitals obtained from the Perinatal Register for deliveries in 2016 were merged with vaccination records from the NT immunisation register.

RESULTS

There were 3,392 viable pregnancies in NT public hospitals in 2016 with 45.6% vaccination coverage against influenza. There was a statistically significant difference in coverage with 68.5% in Indigenous vs 31.7% in non-Indigenous deliveries (p < 0.001), yielding an odds ratio of 4.67 (95% CI 4.02, 5.42) for maternal influenza vaccination across Indigenous status. Influenza vaccination coverage for preterm births (< 37 weeks) was low especially in non-Indigenous mothers at 27.2% vs 65.05% in Indigenous mothers (p < 0.001). A distinct immunisation administration pattern was noted for 2016 with 58.9% of vaccinations occurring between April and June regardless of Indigenous status and maternal gestational age. This correlated with the annual influenza immunisation campaign by the NT and Commonwealth.

CONCLUSION

A year-round maternal influenza vaccination campaign is crucial to avoid missed opportunities and increase vaccination protection for mother and baby. Antenatal influenza vaccination campaign with health care workers education and increasing patient awareness should continue throughout the year.

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.

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

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

DATA SOURCE

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

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

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

PARTICIPANTS & INTERVENTION

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

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

'Links2HealthierBubs' cohort study: protocol for a record linkage study on the safety, uptake and effectiveness of influenza and pertussis vaccines among pregnant Australian women

INTRODUCTION

Pregnant women and infants are at risk of severe influenza and pertussis infection. Inactivated influenza vaccine (IIV) and diphtheria-tetanus-acellular pertussis vaccine (dTpa) are recommended during pregnancy to protect both mothers and infants. In Australia, uptake is not routinely monitored but coverage appears sub-optimal. Evidence on the safety of combined antenatal IIV and dTpa is fragmented or deficient, and there remain knowledge gaps of population-level vaccine effectiveness. We aim to establish a large, population-based, multi-jurisdictional cohort of mother-infant pairs to measure the uptake, safety and effectiveness of antenatal IIV and dTpa vaccines in three Australian jurisdictions. This is a first step toward assessing the impact of antenatal vaccination programmes in Australia, which can then inform government policy with respect to future strategies in national vaccination programmes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: 'Links2HealthierBubs' is an observational, population-based, retrospective cohort study established through probabilistic record linkage of administrative health data. The cohort includes births between 2012 and 2017 (~607 605 mother-infant pairs) in jurisdictions with population-level antenatal vaccination and health outcome data (Western Australia, Queensland and the Northern Territory). Perinatal data will be the reference frame to identify the cohort. Jurisdictional vaccination registers will identify antenatal vaccination status and the gestational timing of vaccination. Information on maternal, fetal and child health outcomes will be obtained from hospitalisation and emergency department records, notifiable diseases databases, developmental anomalies databases, birth and mortality registers.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained from the Western Australian Department of Health, Curtin University, the Menzies School of Health Research, the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, and the West Australian Aboriginal Health Ethics Committees. Research findings will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals, at scientific meetings, and may be incorporated into communication materials for public health agencies and the public.

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.

The Fourth International Neonatal and Maternal Immunization Symposium (INMIS 2017): Toward Integrating Maternal and Infant Immunization Programs

This report provides an overview of the proceedings of the 4th International Maternal and Neonatal Immunization Symposium, where presentations focused on the state-of-the-art research on the development and implementation of vaccines given during pregnancy for the protection of mothers and infants.

Prevention of serious infections in pregnant mothers, newborns, and young infants through immunization during pregnancy and in early life has the potential to further reduce maternal and neonatal morbidity and mortality worldwide. In the past decade, research in this field has advanced substantially, from the understanding of the biology and immunology of pregnancy and early life, to the active development of several candidate vaccines, for which challenges and opportunities for global implementation are under consideration. Experts from academia, industry, regulatory and funding agencies, public health, and international organizations met in Brussels (Belgium) from 10 to 12 September 2017, at the 4th International Neonatal and Maternal Immunization Symposium (INMIS), to review the most relevant advances in maternal and neonatal immunization. The overarching focus of the conference was to identify the path forward to achieve integration of maternal and early life immunization strategies for the successful implementation of vaccines in antenatal care and pediatric programs for reduction of maternal and infant mortality worldwide.

IMPORTANCE This report provides an overview of the proceedings of the 4th International Maternal and Neonatal Immunization Symposium, where presentations focused on the state-of-the-art research on the development and implementation of vaccines given during pregnancy for the protection of mothers and infants.

Vaccination knowledge and acceptability among pregnant women in Italy

The aims of this survey were to ascertain pregnant women's level of knowledge and acceptability on the vaccinations and to identify their associations with several characteristics. A cross-sectional study was performed from December 2017 through March 2018 in the geographic area of Naples, Italy. The study used two stages cluster sampling method for selection and recruitment of participants. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews with pregnant women present at the Obstetrics outpatient clinic of the selected hospitals. A total of 358 respondents agreed to be interviewed out of the 405 pregnant women selected. One-fourth knew at least one of the vaccinations recommended during pregnancy and only 2.8% correctly identified all of these. Women who had received information about the vaccinations during pregnancy from general practitioners or gynecologists or other sources and those with at least one child were more likely to know at least one of the recommended vaccinations, whereas women with middle school education were less knowledgeable. None of the women had received tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis vaccine and only 1.4% the seasonal influenza vaccination. Only 27.9% reported a positive willingness to receive all the recommended vaccinations during pregnancy. Pregnant women would be willing to get all recommended vaccinations if they had at least one child and if they needed additional information, whereas the willingness was significantly lower among women who had reported high school as the highest level of education, who were in the second trimester of pregnancy, and who felt that the recommended vaccines administered during pregnancy were less dangerous for them and for the unborn child. This study suggests important focus points to be taking into account for informing and for implementing education activities on the benefits regarding vaccinations in order to increase the level of knowledge and the uptake in pregnant women.